STAR Correlations and Fluctuations PWG

["JinWu" <wj2016113394 AT mails.ccnu.edu.cn>]

Dear Nu and All,

  Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions, and kindly find my answer below:

  Q1: slide 4 - pile-up: even with the cut at 200 of nPrimaryTrcks, one needs to know the contributions of pile-up, especially at the most central 0-5% bin.

  Answer: in our analysis, the plie-up events are removed by nPrimaryTracks<200 && nPrimaryTracks> -5.19143 + 0.226436x^{2} + 0.000346489 x^{2}-2.43287e-07 x^{3}, as shown in slide below:

 

  According to the comparison of the Refmult2 distribution with and without two specific cuts, it appears that a majority of the pile-up events can be rejected. If this assessment is incorrect, I apologize for any misunderstanding regarding pile-up events. Furthermore, if there still some pile-up events cannot be rejected by two specific cuts and they induce fake density fluctuations, the mixed events method possibly eliminates such false contributions.

  Q2:slide 5 - acceptance: It is clear to me that there is no acceptance at eta = 0. Perhaps it is better to use the eta region of -1 — -0.1 for the analysis?

  Answer: I completely agree. The analysis window should indeed be -1<#eta<-0.1, as there is no acceptance at eta around 0. However, it's important to note that the results for the -1<#eta<-0.1 window are the same as those for -1<#eta<0. This is due to the absence of acceptance at eta around 0, meaning no charged hadrons at eta around 0. Consequently, the number of charged hadrons and multiplicity distribution for -1<#eta<-0.1 are the same as those for -1<#eta<0, and even the same for -1<#eta<0.5. In our analysis, the two-dimensional p_{x}-p_{y} is divided into M^{2} cells to calculate the scaled factorial moments. Since the number of charged hadrons and multiplicity distribution remains unchanged, the values of the scaled factorial moments will also remain unchanged.

  Q3: slide 11 - systematic uncertainty: Do we have information on the relative contributions from pions, Kaons and protons? Different particles may have different response to the cuts used in the uncertainty analysis.

  Answer: well, I don't have. To calculate the scaling exponent (#nu), we need to calculate the scaled factorial moments up to at least the fifth order (q=5), and therefore we need to measure the scaled factorial moment of identified charged hadrons combining proton, pions, kaons together.

  If we measure the scaled factorial moment for proton, pions, kaons separately, the scaled factorial moment of identified charged hadrons cannot be calculated up the fifth order and the scaling exponent cannot be calculated accordingly.  In the following analysis, we intend to calculate the scaled factorial moment only for protons, and observe the scaling power-law of scaled factorial moment and the number of cells (M^{2}), also this analysis will not calculate the scaling exponent.

  Q4- slide 13/15 - energy dependence: Since the rapidity(eta) acceptances are different in collider mode from that from the 3GeV FXT data, this energy dependence may be miss leading. We should do some simulations to understand the effects of the different acceptance.

  Answer: thank you so much for bringing this error to my attention. As the #eta acceptances differ between FXT 3 GeV and 7.7-200 GeV, my previous conclusion is incorrect. Therefore, I would like to propose a new conclusion that the scaling exponent within -1<#eta<-0.1 at 3 GeV, is larger than those within |#eta|<0.5 at 7.7-200 GeV from BES-I data, and don't mention the energy dependence of the scaling exponent. Moreover, I have marked the acceptances into the preliminary request figure as below:

  Due to the limited statistical events and lower multiplicity at 3 GeV, we are unable to analyze the dependence of the scaling exponent on #eta and p_{T} acceptances. However, the BES_II 27 GeV data offers a larger number of statistical events and higher multiplicity, allowing us to analyze the acceptance dependence of the scaling exponent. In terms of model simulation, we will examine the effects of different acceptances using the hybrid UrQMD+CMC model, which can simulate the intermittency signal.

  If it's possible, we still would like to ask preliminary result for intermittency analysis at FXT 3 GeV to show at QPT2023 workshop. We look forward to your reply, thank you very much.

Best regards,

Jin

 

 

------------------ Original ------------------

From:  "Nu Xu"<nxu AT lbl.gov>;

Date:  Fri, Dec 1, 2023 08:53 PM

To:  "star-cf-l"<star-cf-l AT lists.bnl.gov>;

Cc:  "Nu Xu"<nxu AT lbl.gov>; "JinWu"<wj2016113394 AT mails.ccnu.edu.cn>;

Subject:  Re: [Star-cf-l] CF PWG meeting Nov. 30th 2023 time: 9:00 (BNL time)

 

Hi Jin and All,

Thank you for your nice results and presentation.
Here are my questions/suggestions regarding the material:
1) slide 4 - pile-up: even with the cut at 200 of nPrimaryTrcks, one needs to know the contributions of pile-up, especially at the most central 0-5% bin;
2) slide 5 - acceptance: It is clear to me that there is no acceptance at eta = 0. Perhaps it is better to use the eta region of -1 — -0.1 for the analysis?
3) slide 11 - systematic uncertainty: Do we have information on the relative contributions from pions, Kaons and protons? Different particles may have different response to the cuts used in the uncertainty analysis;
4) slide 13/15 - energy dependence: Since the rapidity(eta) acceptances are different in collider mode from that from the 3GeV FXT data, this energy dependence may be miss leading. We should do some simulations to understand the effects of the different acceptance. 

That is all from my side.
Regards,

Nu

> On Nov 29, 2023, at 11:56 PM, JinWu via Star-cf-l <star-cf-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>
> Dear Hanna and Nu,
>
>   Please find my slides for today presentation at: https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/Intermittency_Charged-Hadrons_FXT3GeV-PrelimianryRequest.pdf
>
> Best regards,
> Jin
>  ------------------ Original ------------------
> From:  "JinWu via Star-cf-l"<star-cf-l AT lists.bnl.gov>;
> Date:  Tue, Nov 28, 2023 09:36 AM
> To:  "star-cf-l"<star-cf-l AT lists.bnl.gov>;
> Cc:  "JinWu"<wj2016113394 AT mails.ccnu.edu.cn>;
> Subject:  Re: [Star-cf-l] CF PWG meeting Nov. 30th 2023 time: 9:00 (BNL time)
>  Dear Hanna and Nu,
>
>   I would like to request preliminary on intermittency analysis at 3 GeV for the QPT2023 meeting, kindly add me to the agenda.
>
> Thank you,
> Best regards,
> Jin
>   ------------------ Original ------------------
> From:  "Hanna Paulina Zbroszczyk via Star-cf-l"<star-cf-l AT lists.bnl.gov>;
> Date:  Mon, Nov 27, 2023 11:06 PM
> To:  "star-cf-l"<star-cf-l AT lists.bnl.gov>;
> Cc:  "Hanna Paulina Zbroszczyk"<hanna.zbroszczyk AT pw.edu.pl>;
> Subject:  [Star-cf-l] CF PWG meeting Nov. 30th 2023 time: 9:00 (BNL time)
>  Dear CF Activists,
>
> We  invite you to our weekly CF PWG meeting on Thursday, November 30th, 9:00 AM (BNL time).
> If you would like to contribute, please let me know.
>
> Please try to post your slides at your earliest convenient.
> We will connect via Zoom. Please find the connection details under the meeting webpage.
>
>
> Thank you,
> Hanna and Nu
>
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/luoxf/correlations-and-fluctuations
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/gos/correlations-and-fluctuations-preliminary-plots
>
>
>
> Hanna Paulina Zbroszczyk
> PhD DSc Eng, Professor WUT
>
> E-mail: hanna.zbroszczyk AT pw.edu.pl
> Tel: +48 22 234 5851 (office)
>
> Address:
> Warsaw University of Technology
> Faculty of Physics
> Nuclear Physics Division
> Koszykowa 75
> Office: 117b (via 115)
> 00-662 Warsaw, Poland
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Star-cf-l mailing list
> Star-cf-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-cf-l