STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

[ShinIchi Esumi <esumi.shinichi.gn AT u.tsukuba.ac.jp>]

Dear Shengli
I can also sign off your nice abstract with a few comments below. 
You say the results are not sensitive to the methods, but I understood 
that you’ve selected the methods based on the consistency of the results. 
Is your pAu qualitatively different from dAu and 3HeAu? I’m asking this 
because you say it's similar to pPb at LHC…
Best regards, ShinIchi

> On Sep 23, 2020, at 0:41, Prithwish Tribedy via Star-fcv-l 
> <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
> 
> Hi Shengli,
>  Nice abstract, here are my comments -- with these included I sign off.
> 
> 200 GeV are shown -- > 200 GeV will be shown
> 
> A weak system independent v3 has been found -->  A weak system dependence 
> of v3 has been observed
> 
> for three central small systems --> in the central events of three small 
> systems
> 
> Comparing with different hydro-model  --> Comparison with different 
> hydro-model
> 
> It think the hydrodynamic evolution is no the emphasis here. How about 
> saying "hydro-model calculations with different assumptions on the initial 
> conditions" ?
> 
> dominated by sub-nulceon fluctuations --> dominated by sub-nulceon scale 
> fluctuations
> 
> vn in p+Au is similar to that in p+Pb from LHC --> vn in p+Au at RHIC is 
> similar to the same in p+Pb at the LHC
> 
> We will also discuss the proposed O+O run at RHIC in future --> In the 
> context of our measurement we will also discuss the prospects of the 
> proposed O+O run at RHIC
> 
> It will supply a direct comparison with LHC O+O results --> It will 
> facilitate a direct comparison with the results from an anticipated O+O run 
> at the LHC
> 
> underlined physics for the anisotropic behavior and initial geometry in 
> small system.
> -->
> underlying physics driving the anisotropic behavior and the role of the 
> initial geometry in small collision systems.
> 
> Best,
> Prithwish
> 
> 
> 
> On 2020-09-22 10:20, Shengli Huang via Star-fcv-l wrote:
>> Dear Jiangyong,
>>     Thanks for the comments. I update the abstract by taking your
>> suggestion.
>> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/52107
>> Thanks!
>> Shengli
>> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 8:17 AM Jiangyong Jia via Star-fcv-l
>> <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>>> Hi, Shengli,
>>> The abstract looks good. I think you should mention the additional
>>> study
>>> you have done since QM, so it does not sounds like a repeat of the
>>> QM talk.
>>> I would mention
>>> 1)  a detailed evaluation of the non-flow and method dependence have
>>> been carried out. The results main robust.
>>> 2)  comprehensive comparison with recent model calculations has been
>>> performed, which provide new material for interpretation.
>>> 3)  mention a detailed comparison with LHC has been done for various
>>> systems and provide motivation for O+O runs.
>>> 4) anything you should say about the c2{4} measurement?
>>> Jiangyong
>>> On 9/16/20 8:28 PM, webmaster--- via Star-fcv-l wrote:
>>>> Dear star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
>>>> Shengli Huang (shengli.huang AT stonybrook.edu) has submitted a
>>> material for a
>>>> review, please have a look:
>>>> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/52107
>>>> ---
>>>> If you have any problems with the review process, please contact
>>>> webmaster AT www.star.bnl.gov
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Star-fcv-l mailing list
>>>> Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov
>>>> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fcv-l
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Star-fcv-l mailing list
>>> Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov
>>> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fcv-l
>> _______________________________________________
>> Star-fcv-l mailing list
>> Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov
>> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fcv-l
> _______________________________________________
> Star-fcv-l mailing list
> Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fcv-l

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature