AG-2026.03-1627·hep-ph
Comparing EPOS-4, EPOS-LHC, and SMASH for identified-hadron observables in the NICA energy range
Authors
- Murad Badshah
- Haifa I. Alrebdi
- Sana Raza Khan
- Muhammad Ajaz
Abstract
We present a systematic simulation study of identified hadron production in minimum bias Au+Au collisions at sqrt(sNN) = 6, 7, and 8 GeV. The event samples were generated with three modern frameworks based on different microscopic pictures: EPOS-LHC, EPOS-4, and the purely hadronic transport model SMASH. We compare observables that probe baryon stopping, transverse dynamics, hadron formation, and strangeness production: rapidity densities dN/dy, transverse momentum spectra dN/dpT, two dimensional pT-y distributions, v2/nq versus pT/nq, and the yield ratios pi-/pi+, K-/K+, pbar/p, K+/pi+, K-/pi-, p/pi+, and Lambda/pi+. For charged and neutral pions, the three models give broadly similar yields and spectral shapes in both dN/dy and dN/dpT. At these energies, resonance decays and isospin constraints reduce the sensitivity to early stage dynamics. In contrast, strange mesons and baryons remain strongly model dependent. EPOS-4 gives the largest midrapidity K+ and Lambda yields and the hardest kaon and strange baryon pT spectra. EPOS-LHC is generally intermediate, while SMASH gives lower strange hadron production. The two dimensional pT-y maps show that the EPOS models populate higher pT over a broader rapidity range. For NCQ scaled elliptic flow, the best approximate scaling is seen in EPOS-LHC, while SMASH and EPOS-4 show only partial scaling. This suggests that EPOS-LHC carries a more coherent partonic anisotropy to the hadronic stage in this energy range. Overall, the model separation grows from 6 to 8 GeV. The clearest discriminators in the NICA domain are intermediate pT baryon to meson ratios, Lambda/pi+, the rapidity dependence of pT, the pT dependence of K-/K+, and NCQ scaled v2.
Submitted
23 March 20261 month ago
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2603.21764
Chat with this PDF
Ask questions, probe assumptions, request a plain-English summary. Answers cite sections from the preprint itself.
Community
Questions and answers about this paper from other readers. No formal peer review — just a place to think out loud.