sphenix-l AT lists.bnl.gov
Subject: sPHENIX is a new detector at RHIC.
List archive
- From: Megan Connors <meganeconnors AT gmail.com>
- To: "Perepelitsa, Dennis" <dvp AT bnl.gov>
- Cc: "sphenix-l AT lists.bnl.gov" <sphenix-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
- Subject: Re: [Sphenix-l] Slides for INT Workshop
- Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2021 10:46:48 -0400
Hi Dennis,
Thanks for the feedback. I updated the slides accordingly except the following two points:
-For Slide 8, do you think I should bump this to the back up slides or just keep your comment in mind?
-I double checked with Rosi about the EPD status and she wants to make sure the ink is fully dry before announcing it officially anywhere but I think I can say verbally more than what I have on the slide though.
Best,
-Megan
On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 10:27 AM Perepelitsa, Dennis <dvp AT bnl.gov> wrote:
Hi Megan,
Thanks for the draft of what looks like an excellent talk!
Please consider just a handful of comments, since I know time is limited before your talk:
slide 6 - If you have space/time for it, I like to stress that the calorimeters allow for unbiased, efficient triggering in p+p. Having a large-statistics sample of p+p reference data will be a key advantage for sPHENIX both in making real data-to-data RAAs and in understanding the jet energy scale just in p+p collisions.
slide 11 - Instead of “Tracking system provides improved energy response”, you might sell the main benefits of Particle Flow as, e.g. “Tracking information reduces sensitivity to fragmentation, better allows sub-structure measurements” (since one can always correct calo jets for the average response)
slide 21 - The Event Plane Detector is no longer simply “Proposed” - it is funded by an NSF MRI!
slides 24 and 25 - Are these theoretical calculations within the SCET_G framework? If so, you might label them as such, since people at the workshop may recognize that better than “pQCD” (which is a bit more mysterious)
More granular comments:
slide 8 - For these particular kinematics, the effect on the JER is actually pretty modest, because the “separation” in the response between different phi-Psi_2 regions is smaller than the intrinsic resolution in any particular region.
slide 9 - I would flip the two bullet points (the expected “ordering” is in the JER at low-pT)
Dennis
On Aug 12, 2021, at 5:22 AM, Megan Connors via sPHENIX-l <sphenix-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
_______________________________________________Dear all,
Sorry for the extremely late posting. I was invited to present at the INT workshop. The talk is today at 1pm ET. My slides are at the attached link. Thank you if you get a chance to look and comment before then and thanks to Rosi for the overnight feedback. Again apologies for the late posting.
Thanks,
sPHENIX-l mailing list
sPHENIX-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/sphenix-l
Dennis V. PerepelitsaAssistant Professor, Physics DepartmentUniversity of Colorado Boulder
-
[Sphenix-l] Slides for INT Workshop,
Megan Connors, 08/12/2021
-
Re: [Sphenix-l] Slides for INT Workshop,
Perepelitsa, Dennis, 08/12/2021
-
Re: [Sphenix-l] Slides for INT Workshop,
Megan Connors, 08/12/2021
- Re: [Sphenix-l] Slides for INT Workshop, Perepelitsa, Dennis, 08/12/2021
-
Re: [Sphenix-l] Slides for INT Workshop,
Megan Connors, 08/12/2021
-
Re: [Sphenix-l] Slides for INT Workshop,
Perepelitsa, Dennis, 08/12/2021
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.