sPHENIX is a new detector at RHIC.

[Hideki Okawa <Hideki.Okawa AT cern.ch>]

Dear all,

If I don't receive further comments on the second version

of the draft by the end of tomorrow (Wed) EDT, I would

like to go ahead with the submission.

Best regards,

Hideki

---

From: Hideki Okawa
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2022 23:13
To: Sickles, Anne M
Cc: Gunther M Roland via sPHENIX-l
Subject: RE: [Sphenix-l] Draft proceedings for SQM2022

Hi Anne,

Thank you so much for your thorough review and suggestions.

FYI, we were informed this Wed that the deadline is extended

to Sep. 10. Anyway, I should be able to submit earlier.

The updated draft is here:

https://cernbox.cern.ch/index.php/s/VUMfR0fAOAtq0ES 

Below are my replies.

> abstract: here please mention that sPHENIX is at RHIC and that the observables listed are to be measured in Au-Au collisions to understand the QGP (cold QCD is already mentioned)

Updated to:

sPHENIX is a state-of-the-art experiment at the Relativistic Heavy

Ion Collider. Hard probes are to be measured in p+p, p+Au and

Au+Au collisions to understand the properties of the quark-gluon

plasma.

> introduction

> line 16: include a reference to a review article for the QGP

Done

> line 19: suggest "understand the inner workings of the QGP via measurements of hard probes in heavy-ion collisions at RHIC"

Done

> line 21-24: in place of this paragraph, I suggest discussing the fact that the detector is nearly completion and will have it's first data in 2023.

Added.

> line 25: I suggest swapping Section 2 (sPHENIX Detector) with Section 3 (which I suggest renaming to sPHENIX Physics) as that will give the reader more context to understand the design of the detector

Done.

I should have also correctly moved all the abbreviation definitions earlier...

> line 27: "full delivered luminosity of RHIC"

Done

> line 33/34: The sPHENIX detector will allow for full, unbiased jet reconstruction, b-jet tagging, and measurements of the three upsilon states separating in both heavy-ion and pp collisions.

Done

> section 2.1

> I suggest combining the short paragraphs into a single longer paragraph to improve the flow & adding a plot > of the tracking performance to support the discussion.

Agreed. I thought about combining the paragraphs, but was not sure.

So, thank you for your comment.

I also added the tracking performance plots, but because of that, I removed

one upsilon and cold QCD plot respectively, and put them together in a

single caption. 

> section 2.2

> here you might leave the discussion of the various resolutions to the previously published technical papers and > note that the EMCal provides the electron identification for the upsilons and the photon measurements and

> that the entire calorimeter system has sufficient resolution for our jet studies

I added descriptions about the electron ID and photons.

I presume you suggested to simplify the resolution part to keep it short?

I kept the EMCal resolution part as it is, since changing it did not make it

any shorter. I did simplify the HCal resolution part by citing the testbeam

paper as you suggested.  Please let me know if you have further comments.

> section 2.3: for the MBD/sEPD discussion, I would condense it by removing the number of channels

Done

> section 2.4: the text should be clear that we will take a very large number of MB AuAu events including both the tracker & the calorimeter; the streaming readout improves the track-only measurements for pA & pp collisions

Rephrased it to:

It will increase the amount of minimum bias data in the p+p and p+Au collisions

by orders of magnitude. It is crucial for track-only measurements in open heavy

flavor physics as well as cold QCD.

> line 81: start by discussing the physics program (suggest quoting from the long range plan). Then discuss how > we need to commission the detector, and accumulate luminosity for both the AuAu & reference pp data to

> achieve these goals. The three year run plan outlines the data needed to achieve the physics goals.

I rephrased the first sentence to:

"The scientific mission of sPHENIX is to probe the QGP at multiple length scales..."

and then I added a paragraph to mention the data taking plans and how we can

achieve our goals.

> line 83: I would remove the EIC reference.

Done

> section 3.1:

> I would include the plot that shows the number of jets/photons/etc we expect from the AuAu running (even if

> it means you have to remove a projection plot). I think the main point is that we will have a comprehensive jet

> program. The projections are examples of what we are able to do, but not the entire scope of our

> measurements.

There is a constraint that one can only include plots shown in the presentation.

So, I've added the jet/photon/hadron R_AA projection instead (which was in my

talk). This should give us a similar message and an idea about the kinematic

reach at least. I hope this is fine with you.

I removed the R_AA(R^jet)/R_AA(0.2) plot because of this change.

> line 93: If you want to discuss the "dramatic difference" between RHIC and LHC you should do it in the context of specific observables

I meant to point to the previous sentence. So, I clarified it by adding

x_{Jy} there and calling it a "flag-ship observable". I hope this is clearer.

> line 107: "Upsilon" -> "upsilon"

Done

> line 111: I think it would be good to highlight the precision measurements of the three separated states at RHIC as opposed to "discover the 3S suppression at RHIC"

Done

> section 3.3: since this is about energy loss, I would move it before section 3.2 to tie it closer to the jet discussion

Done

> I would merge section 4 with section 5. You can say that the detector will be ready for commissioning with beam in early 2023. I suggest leaving out the PD2/3 review.

Done

> section 5: I would add again a mention of the QGP & heavy-ion collisions

OK. Similarly updated as the abstract.

references:

> I would remove the references to the CDR & pCDR. For the references to sPHENIX documents (9 & 13) please add direct links so people can find them

Done

> general style: 

> --put in spaces between numbers and units/math symbols

Done 

> --avoid the use of first person pronouns such as “we"

Done

Best regards,

Hideki

---

From: Sickles, Anne M [sickles AT illinois.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2022 05:00
To: Hideki Okawa
Cc: Gunther M Roland via sPHENIX-l
Subject: Re: [Sphenix-l] Draft proceedings for SQM2022

Hi HIdeki,

Thank you for the very nice proceedings and for posting them in a timely manner.  Please find some comments below.

Best,

Anne

abstract: here please mention that sPHENIX is at RHIC and that the observables listed are to be measured in Au-Au collisions to understand the QGP (cold QCD is already mentioned)

introduction

line 16: include a reference to a review article for the QGP

line 19: suggest "understand the inner workings of the QGP via measurements of hard probes in heavy-ion collisions at RHIC"

line 21-24: in place of this paragraph, I suggest discussing the fact that the detector is nearly completion and will have it's first data in 2023.

line 25: I suggest swapping Section 2 (sPHENIX Detector) with Section 3 (which I suggest renaming to sPHENIX Physics) as that will give the reader more context to understand the design of the detector

line 27: "full delivered luminosity of RHIC"

line 33/34: The sPHENIX detector will allow for full, unbiased jet reconstruction, b-jet tagging, and measurements of the three upsilon states separating in both heavy-ion and pp collisions.

section 2.1

I suggest combining the short paragraphs into a single longer paragraph to improve the flow & adding a plot of the tracking performance to support the discussion.

section 2.2

here you might leave the discussion of the various resolutions to the previously published technical papers and note that the EMCal provides the electron identification for the upsilons and the photon measurements and that the entire calorimeter system has sufficient resolution for our jet studies

section 2.3: for the MBD/sEPD discussion, I would condense it by removing the number of channels

section 2.4: the text should be clear that we will take a very large number of MB AuAu events including both the tracker & the calorimeter; the streaming readout improves the track-only measurements for pA & pp collisions

line 81: start by discussing the physics program (suggest quoting from the long range plan). Then discuss how we need to commission the detector, and accumulate luminosity for both the AuAu & reference pp data to achieve these goals. The three year run plan outlines the data needed to achieve the physics goals.

line 83: I would remove the EIC reference.

section 3.1:

I would include the plot that shows the number of jets/photons/etc we expect from the AuAu running (even if it means you have to remove a projection plot). I think the main point is that we will have a comprehensive jet program. The projections are examples of what we are able to do, but not the entire scope of our measurements.

line 93: If you want to discuss the "dramatic difference" between RHIC and LHC you should do it in the context of specific observables

line 107: "Upsilon" -> "upsilon"

line 111: I think it would be good to highlight the precision measurements of the three separated states at RHIC as opposed to "discover the 3S suppression at RHIC"

section 3.3: since this is about energy loss, I would move it before section 3.2 to tie it closer to the jet discussion

I would merge section 4 with section 5. You can say that the detector will be ready for commissioning with beam in early 2023. I suggest leaving out the PD2/3 review.

section 5: I would add again a mention of the QGP & heavy-ion collisions

references:

I would remove the references to the CDR & pCDR. For the references to sPHENIX documents (9 & 13) please add direct links so people can find them

general style: 

--put in spaces between numbers and units/math symbols

--avoid the use of first person pronouns such as “we"

---------------------------------------------------------

Anne Sickles

Associate Professor

University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign

sickles AT illinois.edu

---------------------------------------------------------

On Aug 17, 2022, at 3:58 AM, Hideki Okawa via sPHENIX-l <sphenix-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Dear all, 

I am sending you a draft of my proceedings for the SQM2022: 

https://cernbox.cern.ch/index.php/s/VUMfR0fAOAtq0ES

The length is 6 pages for the plenary talks. 
The deadline for the submission is Aug. 28. 

Your comments and suggestions would be highly appreciated!

Best regards, 

Hideki

 

_______________________________________________
sPHENIX-l mailing list
sPHENIX-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/sphenix-l__;!!DZ3fjg!7ttrxESp8TQE2jPBMIlYnD4-NVfvQ-GZ2S0TZR9ekPzm5sljyA3M-Cp-AAl9-EoHM3qRML5YEljG5qf8hhg5kWHK1Q$