The most important thing to keep in mind is that the LHC cannot directly check baryon conservation because of limited kinematic coverage of the detectors (many fragments fly down the beam pipe), and the difficulty in detecting neutral baryons (such as neutrons).

The Alice experiment measures a small net-proton excess at central rapidity (longitudinal momentum), where the detector has coverage. This is not surprising -- a bigger excess was observed at RHIC. The mechanism is related to the fact that most baryons at central rapidity are produced by hadronization of pair produced quarks and anti-quarks, but some are produced by stopping of baryons in the original nuclei (which obviously have an excess of baryons over anti-baryons). The effect is bigger at lower energy (RHIC), because the nuclei have smaller energy, and projectile baryons are easier to stop.

There is a mechanism for baryon number violation in the standard model (related to electroweak instantons, see for example this question). This rate is unobservably small under ordinary conditions, but at some point there were suggestions that the rate grows with energy, and that the effect could be observable at the LHC (see, e.g. Arnold and Mattis). The idea was that these events would be unusual in many ways (democratic in quark and lepton flavor, many W's produced, most at central rapidity), so that events can be detected without complete kinematic coverage. This is now considered extremely unlikely.

I think you can safely ignore the X-82 story (this is about details of the accretion mechanism in neutron stars).

The most important thing to keep in mind is that the LHC cannot directly check baryon conservation because of limited kinematic coverage of the detectors (many fragments fly down the beam pipe), and the difficulty in detecting neutral baryons (such as neutrons). The closest thing one can do is look for specific baryon number violating decays that involve distinct final states.

The Alice experiment measures a small net-proton excess at central rapidity (longitudinal momentum), where the detector has coverage. This is not surprising -- a bigger excess was observed at RHIC. The mechanism is related to the fact that most baryons at central rapidity are produced by hadronization of pair produced quarks and anti-quarks, but some are produced by stopping of baryons in the original nuclei (which obviously have an excess of baryons over anti-baryons). The effect is bigger at lower energy (RHIC), because the nuclei have smaller energy, and projectile baryons are easier to stop.

There is a mechanism for baryon number violation in the standard model (related to electroweak instantons, see for example this question). This rate is unobservably small under ordinary conditions, but at some point there were suggestions that the rate grows with energy, and that the effect could be observable at the LHC (see, e.g. Arnold and Mattis). The idea was that these events would be unusual in many ways (democratic in quark and lepton flavor, many W's produced, most at central rapidity), so that events can be detected without complete kinematic coverage. This is now considered extremely unlikely.

I think you can safely ignore the X-82 story (this is about details of the accretion mechanism in neutron stars).

The most important thing to keep in mind is that the LHC cannot directly check baryon conservation because of limited kinematic coverage of the detectors (many fragments fly down the beam pipe), and the difficult in detecting neutral baryons (such as neutrons).

The Alice experiment measures a small net-proton excess at central rapidity (longitudinal momentum), where the detector has coverage. This is not surprising -- a bigger excess was observed at RHIC. The mechanism is related to the fact that most baryons at central rapidity are produced by hadronization of pair produced quarks and anti-quarks, but some are produced by stopping of baryons in the original nuclei (which obviously have an excess of baryons over anti-baryons). The effect is bigger at lower energy (RHIC), because the nuclei have smaller energy, and projectile baryons are easier to stop.

There is a mechanism for baryon number violation in the standard model (related to electroweak instantons, see for example this question). This rate is unobservably small under ordinary conditions, but at some point there were suggestions that the rate grows with energy, and that the effect could be observable at the LHC (see, e.g. Arnold and Mattis). The idea was that these events would be unusual in many ways (democratic in quark and lepton flavor, many W's produced, most at central rapidity), so that events can be detected without complete kinematic coverage. This is now considered extremely unlikely.

I think you can safely ignore the X-82 story (this is about details of the accretion mechanism in neutron stars).

The most important thing to keep in mind is that the LHC cannot directly check baryon conservation because of limited kinematic coverage of the detectors (many fragments fly down the beam pipe), and the difficulty in detecting neutral baryons (such as neutrons).

The Alice experiment measures a small net-proton excess at central rapidity (longitudinal momentum), where the detector has coverage. This is not surprising -- a bigger excess was observed at RHIC. The mechanism is related to the fact that most baryons at central rapidity are produced by hadronization of pair produced quarks and anti-quarks, but some are produced by stopping of baryons in the original nuclei (which obviously have an excess of baryons over anti-baryons). The effect is bigger at lower energy (RHIC), because the nuclei have smaller energy, and projectile baryons are easier to stop.

There is a mechanism for baryon number violation in the standard model (related to electroweak instantons, see for example this question). This rate is unobservably small under ordinary conditions, but at some point there were suggestions that the rate grows with energy, and that the effect could be observable at the LHC (see, e.g. Arnold and Mattis). The idea was that these events would be unusual in many ways (democratic in quark and lepton flavor, many W's produced, most at central rapidity), so that events can be detected without complete kinematic coverage. This is now considered extremely unlikely.

I think you can safely ignore the X-82 story (this is about details of the accretion mechanism in neutron stars).