STAR Correlations and Fluctuations PWG

[Grigory Nigmatkulov <nigmatkulov AT gmail.com>]

Dear Hanna,

Thank you for your nice comments. I've updated slides. The new version can be found here:

https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/Nigmatkulov_Nucleus2022_v2.pdf

Please find responses to the comments/suggestions below.

Slide 2:

>Critical Point is still hypothetical,.

Yes, but there is a word HINT above that is supported by multiple STAR measurements (for example, net proton fluctuations).

>We know from STAR that a low energies (~ \sqrt{sNN} = 3 GeV) the Critical Point is not expected.

The CP search is mentioned in the BES-I energy range, not in FXT.

>While you mention we need higher statistics, specify what do you mean by „higher”.

Done.

>When you write „Increased detector acceptance”, add what you gain (in terms of statistics)

Not sure what I understand the question. Amount of recorded events will depend on the trigger + reco + QA.

The detector upgrade details (including the acceptance improvements) are listed on the next slide (#3).

>Mention which   \miu_B we can access with 3 programs: BES-I-, BES-II and FXT (FXT is not mentioned at all at the collected statistics plot while you show it at the QCD phase diagram)

Some of those are shown on the bottom right figure and values for most of the energy points are shown on slide 5.

Slide 5:

>It is not necessary to mention 200 GeV (not a part of BES program)

I prefer to keep it.

>Do you intend to concentrate on BES-II + FXT only?

Not sure I understand the question. The goal of the slide is to advertise BES-II and FXT program.

>As most STAR results come from BES-I, it would be good to mention statistics collected from BES-I too (especially as you mention later results from BES-I)

The slide is quite busy already.

Slide 6:

>Describe what can be learned from both plots including R_{out} and R_{side}, information provided on then slide is very modest

I updated the text to specify the dependence. Most of it I'll explain in the talk.

Slide 7:

>Write correct definition of q_{inv}, define S(r, k), \Psi_{1,2}(r,k)), add vectors signs under vector quantities. Add vectors under momenta: p_{1z}, p_{2z}

Updated.

Slide 8:

>FSI was already defined at slide 7, write just FSI, expand  what do you mean by transport properties and symmetries..

Updated.

>About plots: describe reaction of the collision, energy, types of articles, add legends

Added some information. However, there is a reference to the work from which the plots are taken.

Slide 9:

>as STAR published very nice results for 4.5 GeV, please add them to the left plot.

That will take too much time for me, so I prefer to use the published one.

>Middle plot: consider showing plot from 4.5 GeV paper, it better explains collision energy dependence of R_{out}/R_{side} and R^2_{out}-R^2_{side}

Done.

>Hybrid models: explain what do you mean.

Done

>Explain what do you expect from heavier particles (and what kind of particles do you mean)

I added particle species. The explanation of the reason has been given on the previous slide (slide #8), so I'm not sure

why repeat it here again.

Slide 10:

>the title relates to kaons while you show pions too, rename the slide

Modified.

>Top left: add a legend to blue line too,  specify which pions and kaons you included

I marked fits as black instead. The colors (red and blue) for particle species are obvious.

>Bottom left plot: specify which pions and kaons you included

Not sure I understand but added the extended kinematic (momentum) range for pion and kaon PID.

>Mark/explain where do you see that FSI is needed to describe data (kaons?)

Done.

>About kaon femtoscopy: Diana has beautiful results for K^0_S-K^{ch} too, showing all combination of neutral and charged kaons together makes sense as they complement each other and help to choose the proper parametrization of the strong FSI. Refer of Diana’s SQM or HYPERON  presentation and pick her results

Done (taken from hyperon).

>Saying „excited physics program” what do you mean? BES?

There is nothing about it on slide 10.

Slide 11:

>other -> others

Done (now it is slide 12)

Slide 13:

> specify what kind of expectation do you mean

I added detector upgrades

>Specify: specify: excellent performance of .. what?

Removed the statement

>Remember that BES-II ends at 19.6 GeV, BES ends at 62.4 GeV (you even show it at the slide 2)

Thank you, I do remember. I made a more general statement to satisfy your request.

>Specify what kind of precision analysis are ongoing..

I just added a couple of specific examples. Hope this helps. Otherwise it will be a pure repeat of the whole talk.

Cheers,

Grigory