sPHENIX is a new detector at RHIC.

[SATO Susumu <susumu.sato AT j-parc.jp>]

Dear PPG02 colleague 

Sorry to post this in the list, but not in the Invenio.

 (Though I have consulted with Anne et al. (incl. Dave and John) 

  about current situation where no connectivity to the ppg02's Invenio 

  entries, the situation seems to be not-yet fixed).

The followings are the comments for the PPG02 first release,

--- --- Comments, for ppg02 first release --- ---

[[ Type-I, substantial-type ]]

(1) Fig.5 and related places.

Does this paper have (,and then will this paper make) 

 any interpretation for the systematically-larger mean 

 value (e.g. in Fig.5 Left) for the "closest-match" method 

 than for the "combinatoric" method (, especially much larger 

 at larger abs(eta)?

 

 In other words, (after combining the "combinatoric" and the "closest-match" methods,) 

 is the the concave shape (e.g. in Fig.5 right, especially for central events) 

 at mid-pseudorapidity (= around zero eta),  (to be stated) significant ?

 Or, In much-other words, 

 does the " '1.6 (or the coming larger number)' reduction 

 in uncertainty (stated in the abstract and the conclusion)", 

 make clearer statement (in Fig.5) for the concave shape at abs(eta)<0.3 ? 

 I am asking because this shape (the concave (,or if in contrast, convex)) 

 would related to

 the Baryon stopping at this energy (with these centralities). 

 And this might (probably minorly) change the increasing 

 slope (at larger centralities) in Fig.6 (both the right and the left figures).     

[[ Type-II, editorial-type]]

(2) L3

The title contains the _expression_ "at 200 GeV", but it's better to be "at sqrt(s_NN) =200GeV" 

(3) LL282-338 and Table 1

The main text is itemized by "black dot (L288, L292, L297, L300, L303, L306, L310, L317, and L323",

but it's better to be itemized in "numbered" or in "alphabet-ized", each of which 

is ALSO better shown in Table 1. For the general readers, it is convenient to have easy correspondences between

explanation (shown in the main text) and extracted value (shown in Table 1)   

(4) L421

"S^(1/2)" should be well Tex-formatted.

(5) LL49-99

Are not there any figure to pictorially-show the sPhenix detector ? 

--- --- End of Comments, for ppg02 first release --- ---

Sincerely,

Susumu SATO.

----- Original Message -----
From: Cheng-Wei Shih <cwshih0812 AT gmail.com>
To: sphenix-l AT lists.bnl.gov
Cc: sphenix-ppg02-l AT lists.bnl.gov,sphenix-irc02-l AT lists.bnl.gov,"Shih, Cheng Wei" <cshih AT bnl.gov>
Hao-Ren Jheng <hrjheng AT mit.edu>,Cameron Dean <ctdean AT mit.edu>,Itaru Nakagawa <itaru AT riken.jp>
Date: 2025-03-10 13:01:39
Subject: [[Sphenix-l] ] First circulation of PPG02: Charged hadron multiplicity measurement in Au+Au Collisions at √s_NN = 200 GeV

Dear sPHENIX Collaborators,

PPG-02 would like to announce the first collaboration circulation and review of the paper, targeted for submission to the Journal of High Energy Physics: “Measurement of Charged Hadron Multiplicity in Au+Au Collisions at 200 GeV with the sPHENIX Detector.”

The Invenio entry for the paper draft is: https://sphenix-invenio.sdcc.bnl.gov/records/aga48-gv870

The Invenio entry for the internal analysis note is: https://sphenix-invenio.sdcc.bnl.gov/records/ajtz6-bfe57

We note the following regarding the current results in the paper draft, which are marked in red and described in the footnotes:

- They were obtained using HIJING simulation samples with an older version of the MVTX geometry. The impact of different MVTX geometries is expected to be minimal.

- Two sources of systematic uncertainty have yet to be included: 1) variations due to different event generators/models, and 2) the uncertainty from secondary particles originating from weak decays. These uncertainties are not expected to be dominant compared to the existing ones, and their inclusion should not affect the key physics results or the main conclusions of the paper.

PPG will incorporate these remaining components once the centrality divisions for EPOS and AMPT are available and the analysis is fully processed with the requested simulation samples. PPG has coordinated with the IRC, conveners, and PCs, who have agreed to proceed with the first circulation based on the current status. The outstanding elements will be incorporated before the second circulation.

Best regards,

PPG-02 Analysis Team

IRC: Stefan Bathe (IRC Chair), Xiaochun He, Greg Ottino