sPHENIX Institutional Board

["Perepelitsa, Dennis" <dvp AT bnl.gov>]

Dear Dave and all,

Thanks to the task force for their work addressing this important issue.

Here are some thoughts:

I wonder whether the phrase “the same measurement” may be a bit narrow. A 
given piece of physics can be explored through multiple, distinct 
measurements [1]. Thus, the potential for a conflict of interest could arise 
even when a group is working on formally different measurements in the two 
experiments. The phrase “at a minimum” hints at this a bit, but I wonder if 
we could spell it out more. For example, we could replace “the same 
measurement” with “similar measurements”, or “a measurement with 
substantially similar physics focus”.

The statement seems focused on overlaps between concurrent measurements in 
the present or future. Should we be interested in a group’s previous 
research? If my group measured observable X in 2020 with STAR, but we have 
now left STAR and want to perform a repeat measurement of X in sPHENIX, does 
that come under the purview of this statement?

Finally, I was curious if it was a specific choice to not explicitly name 
“sPHENIX” and “STAR” as the two experiments. Is the spirit of the statement 
also intended to apply to groups making similar measurements at, say, PHENIX 
and sPHENIX? (This seems not likely, but possible.)

Dennis

[1] - One example might be the open question at RHIC about the fate of 
radiated energy from partons passing through the QGP. Measurements by STAR 
and PHENIX give somewhat different physical pictures. These are not “the 
same" measurement (i.e. hard-core-matched jets in STAR vs. gamma+hadron 
correlations in PHENIX) but somebody working on one would surely give the 
appearance of having a vested interest in the outcome of the other. And 
clearly this is physics that sPHENIX will be interested in investigating in 
detail.

> On Nov 29, 2021, at 9:56 AM, David Morrison via sPHENIX-IB-l 
> <sphenix-ib-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
> 
> Dear sPHENIX IB,
> 
> Please find attached a draft "Statement of Principles" crafted by the 
> joint task force on membership in STAR and sPHENIX.  We are soliciting 
> your feedback on the attached text so that we can formulate a reply to 
> the task force.  The statement is one paragraph long, so it doesn't take 
> long to read, but the principles it articulates are worth some 
> reflection.  We would appreciate any feedback you may have (including 
> "looks good to me") by the end of the day Friday, December 3.
> 
> We appreciate the thought and effort the task force – with members from 
> STAR and sPHENIX - has put into developing this statement. The task 
> force members are Declan Keene, Donald Koete, Rosi Reed, Ron Belmont, 
> and Bill Zajc.
> 
> Regards,
> Dave and Gunther
> 
> -- 
> David Morrison  Brookhaven National Laboratory  phone: 631-344-5840
>                 Physics Department, Bldg 510 C    fax: 631-344-3253
>                           Upton, NY 11973-5000  email: dave AT bnl.gov
> <statement of principles.pdf><statement of 
> principles.docx>_______________________________________________
> sPHENIX-IB-l mailing list
> sPHENIX-IB-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/sphenix-ib-l

Dennis V. Perepelitsa
Assistant Professor, Physics Department
University of Colorado Boulder