Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/CommonHTML/jax.js

Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN

Visit us: CMS Public Website, CMS Physics ; Contact us: CMS Publications Committee

CMS-HIN-23-004 ; CERN-EP-2025-014

Observation of nuclear modification of energy-energy correlators inside jets in heavy ion collisions

CMS Collaboration

25 March 2025

Submitted to Phys. Lett. B

Abstract: Energy-energy correlators are constructed by averaging the number of charged particle pairs within jets, weighted by the product of their transverse momenta, as a function of the angular separation of the particles within a pair. They are sensitive to a multitude of perturbative and nonperturbative quantum chromodynamics phenomena in high-energy particle collisions. Using lead-lead data recorded with the CMS detector, energy-energy correlators inside high transverse momentum jets are measured in heavy ion collisions for the first time. The data are obtained at a nucleon-nucleon center-of-mass energy of 5.02 TeV and correspond to an integrated luminosity of 1.70 nb$^{-1}$. A similar analysis is done for proton-proton collisions at the same center-of-mass energy to establish a reference. The ratio of lead-lead to proton-proton energy-energy correlators reveals significant jet substructure modifications in the quark-gluon plasma. The results are compared to different models that incorporate either color coherence or medium response effects, where the two effects predict similar substructure modifications.

Links: e-print arXiv:2503.19993 [hep-ex] (PDF) ; CDS record ; inSPIRE record ; CADI line (restricted) ;

Figures
png pdf	Figure 1: Left: Illustration on how energy-energy correlators are constructed. The green dashed arrow represents the jet axis and the solid arrows represent charged particles. Right: Schematic structure of an energy-energy correlator distribution in pp collisions.
png	Figure 1-a: Left: Illustration on how energy-energy correlators are constructed. The green dashed arrow represents the jet axis and the solid arrows represent charged particles. Right: Schematic structure of an energy-energy correlator distribution in pp collisions.
png	Figure 1-b: Left: Illustration on how energy-energy correlators are constructed. The green dashed arrow represents the jet axis and the solid arrows represent charged particles. Right: Schematic structure of an energy-energy correlator distribution in pp collisions.
png pdf	Figure 2: Centrality and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ dependent energy-energy correlators for $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV. The red squares show the $n=$ 1 and the blue circles the $n=$ 2 distributions for PbPb collisions. The pp results for different centralities are identical, with orange crosses showing the $n=$ 1 and cyan triangle crosses the $n=$ 2 distributions. The error bars show statistical uncertainties, the point-by-point systematic uncertainties are shown in boxes, while the error bands show systematic uncertainties related to the shape of the distribution. The two colors illustrate that the shape uncertainties tend to tilt the distribution one way or another. All correlators have been normalized to unity in the plotted range.
png pdf	Figure 3: Centrality and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ dependent energy-energy correlators for $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV. The red squares show the $n=$ 1 and the blue circles the $n=$ 2 distributions for PbPb collisions. The pp results for different centralities are identical, with orange crosses showing the $n=$ 1 and cyan triangle crosses the $n=$ 2 distributions. The error bars show statistical uncertainties, the point-by-point systematic uncertainties are shown in boxes, while the error bands show systematic uncertainties related to the shape of the distribution. The two colors illustrate that the shape uncertainties tend to tilt the distribution one way or another. All correlators have been normalized to unity in the plotted range.
png pdf	Figure 4: Centrality- and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$-dependent ratios of PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV and for both $n=$ 1 (red squares) and $n=$ 2 (blue circles). The error bars show statistical uncertainties, the point-by-point systematic uncertainties are shown in boxes, while the error bands show systematic uncertainties related to the shape of the ratio. The two colors illustrate that the shape uncertainties tend to tilt the ratio one way or another.
png pdf	Figure 5: Centrality- and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$-dependent ratios of PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and for both $n=$ 1 (red squares) and $n=$ 2 (blue circles). The error bars show statistical uncertainties, the point-by-point systematic uncertainties are shown in boxes, while the error bands show systematic uncertainties related to the shape of the ratio. The two colors illustrate that the shape uncertainties tend to tilt the ratio one way or another.
png pdf	Figure 6: Comparison of PYTHIA [58], HERWIG [61,62], and the hybrid model [82,83,84] calculations to the observed energy-energy correlators for $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV, 120 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 140 GeV and $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in pp collisions. In the lower panels, the experimental uncertainties are indicated by the bands around unity.
png pdf	Figure 6-a: Comparison of PYTHIA [58], HERWIG [61,62], and the hybrid model [82,83,84] calculations to the observed energy-energy correlators for $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV, 120 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 140 GeV and $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in pp collisions. In the lower panels, the experimental uncertainties are indicated by the bands around unity.
png pdf	Figure 6-b: Comparison of PYTHIA [58], HERWIG [61,62], and the hybrid model [82,83,84] calculations to the observed energy-energy correlators for $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV, 120 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 140 GeV and $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in pp collisions. In the lower panels, the experimental uncertainties are indicated by the bands around unity.
png pdf	Figure 7: The PbPb to pp ratios of energy-energy correlators with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV and $n=$ 1 are shown for 120 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 140 GeV (left) and 180 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 200 GeV (right) together with the hybrid model [82,83,84] predictions with three different wake settings. In the lower panels, the experimental uncertainties are indicated by the bands around unity.
png pdf	Figure 7-a: The PbPb to pp ratios of energy-energy correlators with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV and $n=$ 1 are shown for 120 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 140 GeV (left) and 180 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 200 GeV (right) together with the hybrid model [82,83,84] predictions with three different wake settings. In the lower panels, the experimental uncertainties are indicated by the bands around unity.
png pdf	Figure 7-b: The PbPb to pp ratios of energy-energy correlators with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV and $n=$ 1 are shown for 120 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 140 GeV (left) and 180 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 200 GeV (right) together with the hybrid model [82,83,84] predictions with three different wake settings. In the lower panels, the experimental uncertainties are indicated by the bands around unity.
png pdf	Figure 8: The double ratios of $n=$ 1 PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV to $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV are shown for 120 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 140 GeV (left) and 180 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 200 GeV (right) together with the hybrid model [82,83,84] predictions with three different wake settings. In the lower panels, the experimental uncertainties are indicated by the bands around unity.
png pdf	Figure 8-a: The double ratios of $n=$ 1 PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV to $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV are shown for 120 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 140 GeV (left) and 180 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 200 GeV (right) together with the hybrid model [82,83,84] predictions with three different wake settings. In the lower panels, the experimental uncertainties are indicated by the bands around unity.
png pdf	Figure 8-b: The double ratios of $n=$ 1 PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV to $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV are shown for 120 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 140 GeV (left) and 180 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 200 GeV (right) together with the hybrid model [82,83,84] predictions with three different wake settings. In the lower panels, the experimental uncertainties are indicated by the bands around unity.
png pdf	Figure 9: The PbPb to pp ratios of energy-energy correlators with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV and $n=$ 1 are shown for 120 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 140 GeV (left) and 180 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 200 GeV (right) together with predictions from perturbative calculation by Holguin and collaborators [85] and from JEWEL simulation [86,87]. In the lower panels, the experimental uncertainties are indicated by the bands around unity.
png pdf	Figure 9-a: The PbPb to pp ratios of energy-energy correlators with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV and $n=$ 1 are shown for 120 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 140 GeV (left) and 180 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 200 GeV (right) together with predictions from perturbative calculation by Holguin and collaborators [85] and from JEWEL simulation [86,87]. In the lower panels, the experimental uncertainties are indicated by the bands around unity.
png pdf	Figure 9-b: The PbPb to pp ratios of energy-energy correlators with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV and $n=$ 1 are shown for 120 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 140 GeV (left) and 180 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 200 GeV (right) together with predictions from perturbative calculation by Holguin and collaborators [85] and from JEWEL simulation [86,87]. In the lower panels, the experimental uncertainties are indicated by the bands around unity.
png pdf	Figure 10: The PbPb to pp ratios of energy-energy correlators with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV and $n=$ 1 are shown for 120 $< p_{\text{T,jet}} <$ 140 GeV together with predictions from CoLBT model [88,89,90]. The q-values are shown for PbPb collisions, the value is fixed to 0.5 for pp. In the lower panel, the experimental uncertainties are indicated by the bands around unity.
png pdf	Figure 11: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from PYTHIA, HERWIG, and the hybrid model.
png pdf	Figure 11-a: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from PYTHIA, HERWIG, and the hybrid model.
png pdf	Figure 11-b: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from PYTHIA, HERWIG, and the hybrid model.
png pdf	Figure 11-c: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from PYTHIA, HERWIG, and the hybrid model.
png pdf	Figure 11-d: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from PYTHIA, HERWIG, and the hybrid model.
png pdf	Figure 11-e: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from PYTHIA, HERWIG, and the hybrid model.
png pdf	Figure 11-f: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from PYTHIA, HERWIG, and the hybrid model.
png pdf	Figure 11-g: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from PYTHIA, HERWIG, and the hybrid model.
png pdf	Figure 11-h: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from PYTHIA, HERWIG, and the hybrid model.
png pdf	Figure 12: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from PYTHIA, HERWIG, and the hybrid model.
png pdf	Figure 12-a: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from PYTHIA, HERWIG, and the hybrid model.
png pdf	Figure 12-b: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from PYTHIA, HERWIG, and the hybrid model.
png pdf	Figure 12-c: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from PYTHIA, HERWIG, and the hybrid model.
png pdf	Figure 12-d: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from PYTHIA, HERWIG, and the hybrid model.
png pdf	Figure 12-e: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from PYTHIA, HERWIG, and the hybrid model.
png pdf	Figure 12-f: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from PYTHIA, HERWIG, and the hybrid model.
png pdf	Figure 12-g: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from PYTHIA, HERWIG, and the hybrid model.
png pdf	Figure 12-h: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from PYTHIA, HERWIG, and the hybrid model.
png pdf	Figure 13: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to prediction from JEWEL.
png pdf	Figure 13-a: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to prediction from JEWEL.
png pdf	Figure 13-b: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to prediction from JEWEL.
png pdf	Figure 13-c: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to prediction from JEWEL.
png pdf	Figure 13-d: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to prediction from JEWEL.
png pdf	Figure 13-e: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to prediction from JEWEL.
png pdf	Figure 13-f: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to prediction from JEWEL.
png pdf	Figure 13-g: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to prediction from JEWEL.
png pdf	Figure 13-h: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to prediction from JEWEL.
png pdf	Figure 14: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL.
png pdf	Figure 14-a: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL.
png pdf	Figure 14-b: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL.
png pdf	Figure 14-c: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL.
png pdf	Figure 14-d: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL.
png pdf	Figure 14-e: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL.
png pdf	Figure 14-f: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL.
png pdf	Figure 14-g: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL.
png pdf	Figure 14-h: Energy-energy correlator distributions from pp collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL.
png pdf	Figure 15: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 50--90% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 15-a: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 50--90% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 15-b: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 50--90% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 15-c: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 50--90% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 15-d: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 50--90% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 15-e: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 50--90% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 15-f: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 50--90% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 15-g: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 50--90% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 15-h: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 50--90% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 16: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 50--90% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 16-a: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 50--90% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 16-b: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 50--90% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 16-c: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 50--90% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 16-d: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 50--90% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 16-e: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 50--90% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 16-f: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 50--90% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 16-g: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 50--90% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 16-h: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 50--90% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 17: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 30--50% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 17-a: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 30--50% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 17-b: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 30--50% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 17-c: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 30--50% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 17-d: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 30--50% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 17-e: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 30--50% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 17-f: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 30--50% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 17-g: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 30--50% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 17-h: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 30--50% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 18: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 30--50% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 18-a: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 30--50% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 18-b: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 30--50% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 18-c: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 30--50% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 18-d: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 30--50% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 18-e: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 30--50% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 18-f: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 30--50% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 18-g: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 30--50% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 18-h: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 30--50% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 19: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 10--30% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 19-a: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 10--30% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 19-b: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 10--30% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 19-c: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 10--30% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 19-d: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 10--30% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 19-e: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 10--30% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 19-f: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 10--30% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 19-g: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 10--30% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 19-h: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 10--30% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 20: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 10--30% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 20-a: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 10--30% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 20-b: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 10--30% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 20-c: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 10--30% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 20-d: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 10--30% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 20-e: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 10--30% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 20-f: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 10--30% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 20-g: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 10--30% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 20-h: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 10--30% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 21: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 21-a: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 21-b: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 21-c: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 21-d: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 21-e: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 21-f: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 21-g: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 21-h: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 22: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 22-a: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 22-b: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 22-c: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 22-d: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 22-e: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 22-f: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 22-g: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 22-h: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 23: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from perturbative calculation from Holguin and collaborators with different values of the $k$-parameter.
png pdf	Figure 23-a: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from perturbative calculation from Holguin and collaborators with different values of the $k$-parameter.
png pdf	Figure 23-b: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from perturbative calculation from Holguin and collaborators with different values of the $k$-parameter.
png pdf	Figure 23-c: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from perturbative calculation from Holguin and collaborators with different values of the $k$-parameter.
png pdf	Figure 23-d: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from perturbative calculation from Holguin and collaborators with different values of the $k$-parameter.
png pdf	Figure 24: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL simulation with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 24-a: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL simulation with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 24-b: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL simulation with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 24-c: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL simulation with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 24-d: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL simulation with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 24-e: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL simulation with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 24-f: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL simulation with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 24-g: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL simulation with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 24-h: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL simulation with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 25: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL simulation with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 25-a: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL simulation with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 25-b: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL simulation with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 25-c: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL simulation with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 25-d: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL simulation with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 25-e: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL simulation with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 25-f: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL simulation with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 25-g: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL simulation with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 25-h: Energy-energy correlator distributions from 0--10% central PbPb collisions with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from JEWEL simulation with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 26: Ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 26-a: Ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 26-b: Ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 26-c: Ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 26-d: Ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 26-e: Ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 26-f: Ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 26-g: Ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 26-h: Ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 27: Ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 27-a: Ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 27-b: Ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 27-c: Ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 27-d: Ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 27-e: Ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 27-f: Ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 27-g: Ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 27-h: Ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 28: Ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 28-a: Ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 28-b: Ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 28-c: Ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 28-d: Ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 28-e: Ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 28-f: Ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 28-g: Ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 28-h: Ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 29: Ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 29-a: Ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 29-b: Ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 29-c: Ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 29-d: Ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 29-e: Ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 29-f: Ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 29-g: Ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 29-h: Ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 30: Ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 30-a: Ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 30-b: Ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 30-c: Ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 30-d: Ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 30-e: Ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 30-f: Ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 30-g: Ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 30-h: Ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 31: Ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 31-a: Ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 31-b: Ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 31-c: Ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 31-d: Ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 31-e: Ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 31-f: Ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 31-g: Ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 31-h: Ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 32: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 32-a: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 32-b: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 32-c: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 32-d: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 32-e: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 32-f: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 32-g: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 32-h: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 33: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 33-a: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 33-b: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 33-c: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 33-d: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 33-e: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 33-f: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 33-g: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 33-h: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 34: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from perturbative calculation from Holguin and collaborators with different values of the $k$-parameter.
png pdf	Figure 34-a: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from perturbative calculation from Holguin and collaborators with different values of the $k$-parameter.
png pdf	Figure 34-b: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from perturbative calculation from Holguin and collaborators with different values of the $k$-parameter.
png pdf	Figure 34-c: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from perturbative calculation from Holguin and collaborators with different values of the $k$-parameter.
png pdf	Figure 34-d: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to predictions from perturbative calculation from Holguin and collaborators with different values of the $k$-parameter.
png pdf	Figure 35: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to JEWEL predictions with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 35-a: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to JEWEL predictions with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 35-b: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to JEWEL predictions with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 35-c: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to JEWEL predictions with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 35-d: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to JEWEL predictions with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 35-e: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to JEWEL predictions with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 35-f: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to JEWEL predictions with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 35-g: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to JEWEL predictions with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 35-h: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 1 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to JEWEL predictions with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 36: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to JEWEL predictions with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 36-a: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to JEWEL predictions with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 36-b: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to JEWEL predictions with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 36-c: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to JEWEL predictions with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 36-d: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to JEWEL predictions with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 36-e: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to JEWEL predictions with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 36-f: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to JEWEL predictions with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 36-g: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to JEWEL predictions with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 36-h: Ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp energy-energy correlators with $n=$ 2 in different $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ and $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to JEWEL predictions with and without recoils.
png pdf	Figure 37: The double ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 37-a: The double ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 37-b: The double ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 37-c: The double ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 37-d: The double ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 37-e: The double ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 37-f: The double ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 37-g: The double ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 37-h: The double ratios of 50--90% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 38: The double ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 38-a: The double ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 38-b: The double ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 38-c: The double ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 38-d: The double ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 38-e: The double ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 38-f: The double ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 38-g: The double ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 38-h: The double ratios of 30--50% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 39: The double ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 39-a: The double ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 39-b: The double ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 39-c: The double ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 39-d: The double ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 39-e: The double ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 39-f: The double ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 39-g: The double ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 39-h: The double ratios of 10--30% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 40: The double ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 40-a: The double ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 40-b: The double ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 40-c: The double ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 40-d: The double ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 40-e: The double ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 40-f: The double ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 40-g: The double ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.
png pdf	Figure 40-h: The double ratios of 0--10% central PbPb to pp single ratios with $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 2 GeV and $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV for $n=$ 1 (left) and $n=$ 2 (right) in different $p_{\text{T,jet}}$ bins compared to the hybrid model predictions with different jet wake settings.

Summary

For the first time, energy-energy correlators inside high transverse momentum ($p_{\mathrm{T}}$) jets are measured in heavy ion collisions. The correlators from lead-lead (PbPb) data are compared to those from proton-proton (pp) collisions at the same nucleon-nucleon center-of-mass energy of 5.02 TeV obtained using the CMS detector. A highly differential measurement of the two-point energy correlators is presented as a function of separation in azimuth and pseudorapidity of two charged particles within a jet cone, $\Delta r$. The time evolution of the jet fragmentation is imprinted in the shapes of the energy-energy correlator distributions. For both PbPb and pp collisions, we see similar large scale trends. There is a negative slope at large $\Delta r$ in the data, which is interpreted to correspond to the dynamics of the parton shower phase. The positive slope at low $\Delta r$ is expected to reflect the propagation of noninteracting hadrons. The transition region between these two limits is conjectured to be sensitive to information regarding the hadronization process. Within the same kinematic selections, the transition region in PbPb collisions is shifted to lower $\Delta r$ values compared to pp collisions, consistent with parton energy loss. A pronounced enhancement at large $\Delta r$ is observed in the ratio of the PbPb to pp distributions when using a low charged particle $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold of $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}} >$ 1 GeV and taking the product of the $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ of the two particles as the momentum weight. This enhancement disappears if the sensitivity to low-$p_{\mathrm{T}}$ particles is decreased by increasing the $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{ch}}$ threshold to 2 GeV or by taking the square of the product as the momentum weight. A comparison of our data to several models suggests that medium response is partially accountable for the observed enhancement for large $\Delta r$ values. A perturbative calculation with color coherence effects also appears to favor enhancement in this ratio at large $\Delta r$ values. This measurement establishes a powerful new tool for studying the influence of medium response and color coherence on jet substructure and helps to elucidate how jets are affected by interactions with the quark-gluon plasma.

References
1	C. L. Basham, L. S. Brown, S. D. Ellis, and S. T. Love	Energy correlations in electron-positron annihilation: Testing quantum choromodynamics	PRL 41 (1978) 1585
2	C. L. Basham, L. S. Brown, S. D. Ellis, and S. T. Love	Energy correlations in electron-positron annihilation in quantum chromodynamics: Asymptotically free perturbation theory	PRD 19 (1979) 2018
3	H. Chen et al.	Three point energy correlators in the collinear limit: symmetries, dualities and analytic results	JHEP 08 (2020) 028	1912.11050
4	H. Chen, I. Moult, X. Zhang, and H. X. Zhu	Rethinking jets with energy correlators: Tracks, resummation, and analytic continuation	PRD 102 (2020) 054012	2004.11381
5	Y. Li et al.	Extending precision perturbative QCD with track functions	PRL 128 (2022) 182001	2108.01674
6	E. Craft, K. Lee, B. Me ç aj, and I. Moult	Beautiful and charming energy correlators		2210.09311
7	H. Chen et al.	Collinear parton dynamics beyond DGLAP		2210.10061
8	P. T. Komiske, I. Moult, J. Thaler, and H. X. Zhu	Analyzing n-point energy correlators inside jets with CMS open data	PRL 130 (2023) 051901	2201.07800
9	K. Lee, B. Me ç aj, and I. Moult	Conformal collider physics meets LHC data	PRD 111 (2025) L011502	2205.03414
10	A. H. Mueller	On the multiplicity of hadrons in QCD jets	PLB 104 (1981) 161
11	B. I. Ermolaev and V. S. Fadin	Log - log asymptotic form of exclusive cross-sections in quantum chromodynamics	JETP Lett. 33 (1981) 269
12	A. Bassetto, M. Ciafaloni, G. Marchesini, and A. H. Mueller	Jet multiplicity and soft gluon factorization	NPB 207 (1982) 189
13	Y. L. Dokshitzer, V. A. Khoze, S. I. Troian, and A. H. Mueller	QCD coherence in high-energy reactions	Rev. Mod. Phys. 60 (1988) 373
14	C. Andres et al.	Simple scaling laws for energy correlators in nuclear matter		2411.15298
15	ALEPH Collaboration	Measurement of $\alpha_{s}$ from the structure of particle clusters produced in hadronic Z decays	PLB 257 (1991) 479
16	STAR Collaboration	Measurement of two-point energy correlators within jets in $p$+$p$ collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 200 GeV		2502.15925
17	ALICE Collaboration	Exposing the parton-hadron transition within jets with energy-energy correlators in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 5.02 TeV		2409.12687
18	CMS Collaboration	Measurement of energy correlators inside jets and determination of the strong coupling $\alpha_{\mathrm{S}}(m_{\mathrm{Z}})$	PRL 133 (2024) 071903	CMS-SMP-22-015 2402.13864
19	CMS Collaboration	Observation and studies of jet quenching in PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{\smash[b]{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}} =$ 2.76 TeV	Phys. Rev. C 84 (2011) 024906	CMS-HIN-10-004 1102.1957
20	M. Arslandok et al.	Hot QCD white paper		2303.17254
21	S. Cao and X.-N. Wang	Jet quenching and medium response in high-energy heavy-ion collisions: a review	Rept. Prog. Phys. 84 (2021) 024301	2002.04028
22	L. Apolin \'a rio, Y.-J. Lee, and M. Winn	Heavy quarks and jets as probes of the QGP	Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 127 (2022) 103990	2203.16352
23	PHENIX Collaboration	Suppression of hadrons with large transverse momentum in central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{\smash[b]{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}} =$ 130 GeV	PRL 88 (2002) 022301	nucl-ex/0109003
24	STAR Collaboration	Centrality dependence of high $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ hadron suppression in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{\smash[b]{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}} =$ 130 GeV	PRL 89 (2002) 202301	nucl-ex/0206011
25	CMS Collaboration	Study of high-$p_{\mathrm{T}}$ charged particle suppression in PbPb compared to pp collisions at $\sqrt{\smash[b]{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}} =$ 2.76 TeV	EPJC 72 (2012) 1945	CMS-HIN-10-005 1202.2554
26	ATLAS Collaboration	Measurements of the nuclear modification factor for jets in Pb+Pb collisions at $\sqrt{\smash[b]{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}} =$ 2.76 TeV with the ATLAS detector	PRL 114 (2015) 072302	1411.2357
27	CMS Collaboration	First measurement of large area jet transverse momentum spectra in heavy-ion collisions	JHEP 05 (2021) 284	CMS-HIN-18-014 2102.13080
28	CMS Collaboration	Modification of jet shapes in PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{\smash[b]{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}} =$ 2.76 TeV	PLB 730 (2014) 243	CMS-HIN-12-002 1310.0878
29	CMS Collaboration	Jet properties in PbPb and pp collisions at $\sqrt{\smash[b]{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}} =$ 5.02 TeV	JHEP 05 (2018) 006	CMS-HIN-16-020 1803.00042
30	CMS Collaboration	In-medium modification of dijets in PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{\smash[b]{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}} =$ 5.02 TeV	JHEP 05 (2021) 116	CMS-HIN-19-013 2101.04720
31	CMS Collaboration	Measurement of jet fragmentation into charged particles in pp and PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{\smash[b]{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}} =$ 2.76 TeV	JHEP 10 (2012) 087	CMS-HIN-11-004 1205.5872
32	CMS Collaboration	Measurement of the splitting function in pp and PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{\smash[b]{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}} =$ 5.02 TeV	PRL 120 (2018) 142302	CMS-HIN-16-006 1708.09429
33	CMS Collaboration	Measurement of the groomed jet mass in PbPb and pp collisions at $\sqrt{\smash[b]{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}} =$ 5.02 TeV	JHEP 10 (2018) 161	CMS-HIN-16-024 1805.05145
34	CMS Collaboration	Measurement of quark- and gluon-like jet fractions using jet charge in PbPb and pp collisions at 5.02 TeV	JHEP 07 (2020) 115	CMS-HIN-18-018 2004.00602
35	ALICE Collaboration	Measurements of the groomed and ungroomed jet angularities in pp collisions at $\sqrt{\smash[b]{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}} =$ 5.02 TeV	JHEP 05 (2022) 061	2107.11303
36	ALICE Collaboration	Measurement of the angle between jet axes in Pb--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{\smash[b]{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}} =$ 5.02 TeV		2303.13347
37	ATLAS Collaboration	Measurement of substructure-dependent jet suppression in Pb+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV with the ATLAS detector	Phys. Rev. C 107 (2023) 054909	2211.11470
38	CMS Collaboration	Overview of high-density QCD studies with the CMS experiment at the LHC		CMS-HIN-23-011 2405.10785
39	C. Andr é s, F. Dominguez, A. V. Sadofyev, and C. A. Salgado	Jet broadening in flowing matter: Resummation	PRD 106 (2022) 074023	2207.07141
40	C. Andr é s et al.	Resolving the scales of the quark-gluon plasma with energy correlators	PRL 130 (2023) 262301	2209.11236
41	C. Andr é s et al.	A coherent view of the quark-gluon plasma from energy correlators	JHEP 09 (2023) 088	2303.03413
42	J. Barata, X. Mayo L \'o pez, A. V. Sadofyev, and C. A. Salgado	Medium induced gluon spectrum in dense inhomogeneous matter	PRD 108 (2023) 034018	2304.03712
43	J. Barata, J.-P. Blaizot, and Y. Mehtar-Tani	Quantum to classical parton dynamics in QCD media	PRD 108 (2023) 014039	2305.10476
44	J. Barata, P. Caucal, A. Soto-Ontoso, and R. Szafron	Advancing the understanding of energy-energy correlators in heavy-ion collisions	JHEP 11 (2024) 060	2312.12527
45	Z. Yang, Y. He, I. Moult, and X.-N. Wang	Probing the short-distance structure of the quark-gluon plasma with energy correlators	PRL 132 (2024) 011901	2310.01500
46	H. Bossi et al.	Imaging the wakes of jets with energy-energy-energy correlators	JHEP 12 (2024) 073	2407.13818
47	CMS Collaboration	CMS luminosity measurement using nucleus-nucleus collisions at $\sqrt{\smash[b]{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}} =$ 5.02 TeV in 2018	CMS Physics Analysis Summary, 2022 CMS-PAS-LUM-18-001	CMS-PAS-LUM-18-001
48	CMS Collaboration	Precision luminosity measurement in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV in 2015 and 2016 at CMS	EPJC 81 (2021) 800	CMS-LUM-17-003 2104.01927
49	CMS Collaboration	HEPData record for this analysis	link
50	CMS Collaboration	Jet momentum dependence of jet quenching in PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{\smash[b]{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}} =$ 2.76 TeV	PLB 712 (2012) 176	CMS-HIN-11-013 1202.5022
51	CMS Collaboration	The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC	JINST 3 (2008) S08004
52	CMS Collaboration	Development of the CMS detector for the CERN LHC Run 3	JINST 19 (2024) P05064	CMS-PRF-21-001 2309.05466
53	CMS Collaboration	Performance of the CMS level-1 trigger in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV	JINST 15 (2020) P10017	CMS-TRG-17-001 2006.10165
54	CMS Collaboration	The CMS trigger system	JINST 12 (2017) P01020	CMS-TRG-12-001 1609.02366
55	M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez	The anti-$k_{\mathrm{T}}$ jet clustering algorithm	JHEP 04 (2008) 063	0802.1189
56	O. Kodolova, I. Vardanyan, A. Nikitenko, and A. Oulianov	The performance of the jet identification and reconstruction in heavy ions collisions with CMS detector	EPJC 50 (2007) 117
57	CMS Collaboration	Charged-particle nuclear modification factors in PbPb and $\mathrm{p}\text{Pb}$ collisions at $\sqrt{\smash[b]{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}} =$ 5.02 TeV	JHEP 04 (2017) 039	CMS-HIN-15-015 1611.01664
58	T. Sjöstrand et al.	An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2	Comput. Phys. Commun. 191 (2015) 159	1410.3012
59	CMS Collaboration	Extraction and validation of a new set of CMS PYTHIA8 tunes from underlying-event measurements	EPJC 80 (2020) 4	CMS-GEN-17-001 1903.12179
60	NNPDF Collaboration	Parton distributions from high-precision collider data	EPJC 77 (2017) 663	1706.00428
61	M. B ä hr et al.	Herwig++ physics and manual	EPJC 58 (2008) 639	0803.0883
62	J. Bellm et al.	Herwig 7.0/Herwig++ 3.0 release note	EPJC 76 (2016) 196	1512.01178
63	CMS Collaboration	Development and validation of HERWIG 7 tunes from CMS underlying-event measurements	EPJC 81 (2021) 312	CMS-GEN-19-001 2011.03422
64	GEANT4 Collaboration	GEANT 4---a simulation toolkit	NIM A 506 (2003) 250
65	I. P. Lokhtin et al.	Heavy ion event generator HYDJET++ (HYDrodynamics plus JETs)	Comput. Phys. Commun. 180 (2009) 779	0809.2708
66	CMS Collaboration	Description and performance of track and primary-vertex reconstruction with the CMS tracker	JINST 9 (2014) P10009	CMS-TRK-11-001 1405.6569
67	CMS Collaboration	Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector	JINST 12 (2017) P10003	CMS-PRF-14-001 1706.04965
68	M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez	FastJet user manual	EPJC 72 (2012) 1896	1111.6097
69	D. Bertolini, T. Chan, and J. Thaler	Jet observables without jet algorithms	JHEP 04 (2014) 013	1310.7584
70	A. J. Larkoski, D. Neill, and J. Thaler	Jet shapes with the broadening axis	JHEP 04 (2014) 017	1401.2158
71	P. Berta, M. Spousta, D. W. Miller, and R. Leitner	Particle-level pileup subtraction for jets and jet shapes	JHEP 06 (2014) 092	1403.3108
72	ALICE Collaboration	Higher harmonic anisotropic flow measurements of charged particles in Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{\smash[b]{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}} =$ 2.76 TeV	PRL 107 (2011) 032301	1105.3865
73	G. D'Agostini	A multidimensional unfolding method based on Bayes' theorem	NIM A 362 (1995) 487
74	L. Brenner et al.	Comparison of unfolding methods using RooFitUnfold	Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 35 (2020) 2050145	1910.14654
75	E. Gross and O. Vitells	Trial factors for the look elsewhere effect in high energy physics	EPJC 70 (2010) 525	1005.1891
76	CMS Collaboration	Jet energy scale and resolution in the CMS experiment in pp collisions at 8 TeV	JINST 12 (2017) P02014	CMS-JME-13-004 1607.03663
77	Y. Mehtar-Tani, C. A. Salgado, and K. Tywoniuk	Anti-angular ordering of gluon radiation in QCD media	PRL 106 (2011) 122002	1009.2965
78	S. Domdey et al.	QCD evolution of jets in the quark-gluon plasma	Nucl. Phys. A 808 (2008) 178	0802.3282
79	ALICE Collaboration	Measurement of the groomed jet radius and momentum splitting fraction in pp and Pb--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{\smash[b]{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}} =$ 5.02 TeV	PRL 128 (2022) 102001	2107.12984
80	CMS Collaboration	Girth and groomed radius of jets recoiling against isolated photons in lead-lead and proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{\smash[b]{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}} =$ 5.02 TeV	PLB 861 (2025) 139088	CMS-HIN-23-001 2405.02737
81	Y. Mehtar-Tani, D. Pablos, and K. Tywoniuk	Jet suppression and azimuthal anisotropy from RHIC to LHC	PRD 110 (2024) 014009	2402.07869
82	J. Casalderrey-Solana et al.	A hybrid strong/weak coupling approach to jet quenching	JHEP 10 (2014) 019	1405.3864
83	J. Casalderrey-Solana et al.	Angular structure of jet quenching within a hybrid strong/weak coupling model	JHEP 03 (2017) 135	1609.05842
84	J. Casalderrey-Solana et al.	Simultaneous description of hadron and jet suppression in heavy-ion collisions	Phys. Rev. C 99 (2019) 051901	1808.07386
85	C. Andres et al.	Towards an interpretation of the first measurements of energy correlators in the quark-gluon plasma		2407.07936
86	K. Zapp et al.	A Monte Carlo model for 'jet quenching'	EPJC 60 (2009) 617	0804.3568
87	R. Kunnawalkam Elayavalli and K. C. Zapp	Medium response in JEWEL and its impact on jet shape observables in heavy ion collisions	JHEP 07 (2017) 141	1707.01539
88	W. Chen et al.	Effects of jet-induced medium excitation in $\gamma$-hadron correlation in A+A collisions	PLB 777 (2018) 86	1704.03648
89	W. Chen et al.	Medium modification of $\gamma$-jet fragmentation functions in Pb+Pb collisions at LHC	PLB 810 (2020) 135783	2005.09678
90	W. Zhao et al.	From hydrodynamics to jet quenching, coalescence, and hadron cascade: A coupled approach to solving the $R_{\mathrm{AA}} \otimes v_{2}$ puzzle	PRL 128 (2022) 022302	2103.14657

Compact Muon Solenoid LHC, CERN

© Copyright CERN 2024 for the benefit of the CMS Collaboration