STAR Correlations and Fluctuations PWG

[Nu Xu <nxu AT lbl.gov>]

Dear  Sneha,
Is it possible to make it clear that Slide 14 is, infact, a displace of 
p-vale?
At the moment, as far as I can see, it is either (chia^2_apha =2 - chir^2) 
vs. mt or Count. Lev. vs.mt.?????!!!

Regards,
Nu



> On Nov 2, 2024, at 7:06 AM, Bhosale Sneha <bhosales AT staff.elte.hu> wrote:
> 
> Dear Nu,
> Thank you so much for the email. Here are my responses/explanation for you 
> comments;
>  1) Plot The bottom right plot in slide 14 already shows the confidence 
> levels (p-values) that you requested. This plot compares two cases:
> Red triangles: fits with free α
> Black triangles: fits with fixed α = 2.0 (Gaussian case)
> 2) The y-axis shows the confidence levels on a logarithmic scale from 10^-7 
> to 1, clearly demonstrating the several orders of magnitude improvement 
> mentioned in the bullet points when comparing free α fits to Gaussian fits. 
> This plot directly addresses the need for experimental evidence of the 
> improved confidence levels rather than just stating the claim. Also, 
> chi2/NDF difference plot is on top of the confidence level plot.
>  3)Slide 11: Yes, all the parameters are there in traditional gaussian fits
> Thank you.
> Best regards,
> Sneha
> 
> From: Nu Xu <nxu AT lbl.gov>
> Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2024 2:27 PM
> To: Bhosale Sneha <bhosales AT staff.elte.hu>
> Cc: Nu Xu <nxu AT lbl.gov>; STAR Correlations and Fluctuations PWG 
> <star-cf-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
> Subject: Re: [[Star-cf-l] ] WPCF 2024 talk
>  Dear Sneha,
> 
> Thank you for the updated version.
> Here are my comment/suggestions on the v3:
> (1) slide 14 - "Confidence levels (p-values) improve by 1-3 orders of 
> magnitude with free 𝜶”: show a plot or remove the claim;
> (2) "(ii): for all these fits, chi^2/NDF is approximately the same, around 
> 1. It is however not a good number to estimate goodness-of-fit, as for 
> large NDF (number of degrees of freedom) values very small changes in chi^2 
> can lead to large changes in probability. Thus, it is more important to 
> show chi^2, but even more importantly, the probability (p-value or 
> confidence level). “  So show a figure with p-values. Do NOT just claim, 
> show the experimental figures!!!
> (3) slide 11: are parameters already in the ’transitional fits with 
> alpha=2”???
> 
> Regards,
> Nu
> 
> > On Nov 2, 2024, at 2:49 AM, Bhosale Sneha <bhosales AT staff.elte.hu> wrote:
> > 
> > Dear Nu,
> > Thank you so much for the email. Since my talk is on 5th of November 
> > 2024(Tuesday) I mostly removed the things you asked for and here are my 
> > responses/explanation for you comments;
> >  1) A slide could be added to explain the physics meaning but given that 
> > now the talk is very close (Tuesday), I cannot do anything else but just 
> > remove these mentions. I do think the concept is important but it would 
> > probably need discussions within the PWG how the explanatory slides 
> > should look like, so for the sake of time, I removed these statements.
> >  2) For the first point (i), "Lévy-scale R" is the size parameter of the 
> > Lévy distribution, meaning the size of the source. For the second point 
> > (ii): for all these fits, chi^2/NDF is approximately the same, around 1. 
> > It is however not a good number to estimate goodness-of-fit, as for large 
> > NDF (number of degrees of freedom) values very small changes in chi^2 can 
> > lead to large changes in probability. Thus, it is more important to show 
> > chi^2, but even more importantly, the probability (p-value or confidence 
> > level). Nevertheless, I now wrote on the slide that chi^2/NDF is 
> > approximately 1 for all fits.
> >  Actually, the number of parameters differs just by one, alpha is the 
> > only additional parameters. More accurate description can be claimed 
> > because of the difference in the goodness-of-fit. But for the sake of 
> > reaching a good consensus, I removed this wording.
> >  The updated version is now available here for your: (version 3)    
> > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/69661
> >  Thank you again. 
> >  Best regards,
> > Sneha
> > 
> > From: Nu Xu <nxu AT lbl.gov>
> > Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2024 7:46 AM
> > To: Bhosale Sneha <bhosales AT staff.elte.hu>
> > Cc: Nu Xu <nxu AT lbl.gov>; STAR Correlations and Fluctuations PWG 
> > <star-cf-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
> > Subject: Re: [[Star-cf-l] ] WPCF 2024 talk
> >  Dear Sneha,
> > 
> > Thanks for the updated presentation. I do have trouble with some claims 
> > shown in the present slides:
> > 
> > 1) The term Levy Walk mentioned in slides 6, 13, 15, and 17.
> > We throw the term to audiences without explanations, it is very 
> > confusion. For this talk if the concept is needed, then provide the 
> > physics meaning. It it is not needed for this talk, take them all out of 
> > the presentation.
> > 
> > 2) slide 14: (i) What does it mean by “Levy-scaled R”? (ii) right two 
> > plots: are these the chi^2/per degree of freedom? If it is, please note 
> > them so, for example, chi^2/pdf.
> > If I understand, there are many more parameters in the so-called 
> > Levy-fit, including epsilon_o, epsilon_s, epsilon_l?
> > 
> > A fit with many more parameters, in this case is the Levy-fit, can we 
> > really claim “… more accurate shape and size” shown on slide 5?
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > Nu 
> > 
> > > On Nov 1, 2024, at 3:24 AM, Bhosale Sneha <bhosales AT staff.elte.hu> 
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > Dear Nu, 
> > > 
> > > I wanted to follow up on my response to your helpful feedback on my 
> > > presentation. I have incorporated the suggested changes and provided 
> > > explanations where needed, including adjustments on slides 10, 11, 14, 
> > > and 15, along with the reference addition. My responses to your 
> > > suggestions can be found in below email. 
> > > 
> > > The updated version is now available here for your review: 
> > > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/69661
> > > 
> > > Thank you once again for your valuable insights, and I look forward to 
> > > any further suggestions you may have.
> > > 
> > > Best regards,
> > > Sneha
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Get Outlook for AndroidFrom: star-cf-l-request AT lists.bnl.gov 
> > > <star-cf-l-request AT lists.bnl.gov> on behalf of Bhosale Sneha 
> > > <bhosales AT staff.elte.hu>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2024 4:58:25 PM
> > > To: STAR Correlations and Fluctuations PWG <star-cf-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
> > > Cc: Nu Xu <nxu AT lbl.gov>
> > > Subject: Re: [[Star-cf-l] ] WPCF 2024 talk
> > >  Dear Nu,
> > > Thank you so much for he feedback following is my response;
> > >     • Slide 11:  I incorporated your suggestions, and have only one 
> > > nozero digit in all of the uncertainties, and rounded the parameter 
> > > values accordingly.
> > >     • Slide 11: Thank you for pointing it out, it surely needs an 
> > > explanation. I added the explanation of these parameters to slide 10 
> > > where they are discussed in last bullet point; let me also mention here 
> > > that this essentially handles all residual, non-femtoscopic background, 
> > > coming from energy and momentum conservation, resonance decays, bulk 
> > > flow phenomena, minijets.
> > >     • Slide 14: I agree. I now include the chi^2 difference and the 
> > > p-value (confidence level) for both fits. The reference has also been 
> > > added for published data.
> > >     • Slide 15: Agree, it does need a bit explanation. Now I added 3 
> > > bullet points as an explanation.
> > > I have incorporated your suggestion in version 2. Please have a look.
> > > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/69661
> > > Thank you.
> > > Best regards,
> > > Sneha
> > > 
> > > From: star-cf-l-request AT lists.bnl.gov <star-cf-l-request AT lists.bnl.gov> 
> > > on behalf of Nu Xu <nxu AT lbl.gov>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2024 12:17 AM
> > > To: STAR Correlations and Fluctuations PWG <star-cf-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
> > > Cc: Nu Xu <nxu AT lbl.gov>
> > > Subject: Re: [[Star-cf-l] ] WPCF 2024 talk
> > >  Hi Sneha,
> > > 
> > > Thank you for the draft for WPCF2025. I have the following suggestions 
> > > for your consideration:
> > > 1) slide 11 - middle plot: those numbers listed there are too precise, 
> > > perhaps meaningless. For example, lambda could be 0.99+-0.05, R_out 
> > > could be 6.7+-0.2 fm and so on;
> > > 2) slide 11: what are those epsilons? Why do we need them? Any physics 
> > > meanings of these parameters?
> > > 
> > > 3)  slide 14 - last three bullets: instead of these claims, can we 
> > > simply list the fitting results of chi^2/pdf from both alpha=2 and free 
> > > alpha fits? For the alpha =2 data, a reference should be provided.
> > > 
> > > 4) slide 15: what is "Levy walk”? One should explain it in the talk, 
> > > not just point to another talk in my view;
> > > 
> > > That is all for now. 
> > > Best regards,
> > > 
> > > Nu
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > On Oct 29, 2024, at 5:26 AM, Bhosale Sneha <bhosales AT staff.elte.hu> 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Dear All,
> > > > I would like to let you know that the WPCF conference agenda has been 
> > > > released, and my talk is scheduled for the 5th of November 2024, a 
> > > > week from now. I would greatly appreciate if you could review my 
> > > > contribution before the 4th of November. Your feedback and 
> > > > suggestions would be invaluable in improving the presentation.
> > > > 
> > > > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/69661
> > > > 
> > > > Thank you in advance for your time and support.
> > > > 
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > SnehaFrom: star-cf-l-request AT lists.bnl.gov 
> > > > <star-cf-l-request AT lists.bnl.gov> on behalf of Bhosale Sneha 
> > > > <bhosales AT staff.elte.hu>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2024 4:51 PM
> > > > To: STAR Correlations and Fluctuations PWG <star-cf-l AT lists.bnl.gov> 
> > > > <star-cf-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
> > > > Subject: [[Star-cf-l] ] WPCF 2024 talk
> > > >  Dear All,
> > > > Please have a look at my contribution for WPCF2024 talk and let me 
> > > > know your views.
> > > > 
> > > > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/69661
> > > > 
> > > > Thank you very much for considering my request.
> > > > 
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Sneha