STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

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

Dear Egoe
Thanks for the nice presentation of this new results. I have a few questions. 

On p10, I would like to know why only some of the points does have quite 
asymmetric systematic error? 
And why for the most of your cases, the points are at the lower edge of the 
systematic error? While on the 
energy dependence comparison plots on the right panel, the previous data 
points sit mostly on the opposite 
edge of the systematic band...

The difference of the statistical errors between the two methods Xi and 
Xi->Lambda would be mostly 
coming from the alpha parameters, that is about a factor of two, where I do 
see it for points at about 10-40%, 
which is not really the case for the averaged points on the right panel, that 
could be caused by the other effects 
like the e.p. resolution etc… I just like to make sure how you average the 
data for 20-50%, the inverse error 
square weighing or number of particle and/or event weighting? 

Since joey has also shown the centrality dependence of Lambda case in the 
last QM, so I would like to have 
a comparison to your left panel as well. 
Best regards, ShinIchi

> On Sep 26, 2020, at 2:18, webmaster--- via Star-fcv-l 
> <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
> 
> Dear star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
> 
> Egor Alpatov (egroker1 AT gmail.com) has submitted a material for a review,  
> please have a look:
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/52202
> 
> ---
> 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

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