STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

[arkadij71 <arkadij71 AT gmail.com>]

Dear conveners, 

We hope that we implemented all your comments in the new version of proceedings of petr parfenov for icppa2020 conference - can you look please and sign off - in case of no comments. As we passed the deadline - we uder big pressure

Thanks a lot

With Best regards

Arkadiy

Отправлено с моего телефона Huawei

-------- Исходное сообщение --------
От: ShinIchi Esumi via Star-fcv-l <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Дата: вт, 13 окт. 2020 г., 15:20
Кому: "STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG" <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Тема: Re: [Star-fcv-l] STAR presentation by Arkadiy Taranenko for ICPPA-2020 submitted for review

Dear Petr
In addition to what is already mentioned by Jiangyong and Prithwish, I send you
a few more comment for my sign off.

L41 : v2 and v3 … can be replaced by vn (n=2, 3), since “n” is not defined in this
sentence with vn/nq^(n/2) formula.

L109-112 : I have a similar comment as Prithwish that this part does not really related
with the scaling that is also not visible in the way you presented in Fig.3 and 4. So if you
like to keep this, you could move this to the discussion (or more introduction) part for the
Fig.6.

The next two points are for your future PWG presentation.

I also agree with Jiangyong that efficiency (and/or pT acceptance) un-corrected integrated
vn measurements needs to be corrected for the final results.

Since we’ve decided to remove the high pt part of v2/v3 measurement for kaon, because of
the doubt about the PID quality and possible contamination, and we also replaced the energy
dependence plot for v2 difference with the old one, because it did not agree with previous
measurement etc, this automatically mean that we also need to make sure the v3 difference
plot was OK or not (even with high pT exclusion), although we’ve made it as preliminary this
time, especially If you think there is an issue in the v2 difference plot. I hope you can come
back to these points in the PWG with more detailed investigation.

Thank you very much for your continuous hard work.

Best regards, ShinIchi

> On Oct 13, 2020, at 9:40, Prithwish Tribedy via Star-fcv-l <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>
> Hello Arkadiy and Petr,
> Please consider the following comment on your proceedings that is already in a good shape. With these include I sign off.
>
> Comments are on this version:
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/PParfenovICPPA2020version3.pdf
>
> Everywhere, I suggest you use “p” for momentum and $p$ for proton.
>
> line 27:
> "The anisotropic flow is one of the important observable sensitive to the transport properties of the strongly interacting matter: the equation of state (EOS) and the value of η/s"
> —>
> "The anisotropic flow is one of the important observable sensitive to the equation of state (EOS) and transport properties of the strongly interacting matter such as the shear viscosity over entropy ratio η/s"
>
> line 37:
> "and the overall good"
> —>
> "and a good"
>
> line 38:
> "η/s closed to"
> —>
> "η/s close to"
>
> line 63:
> “in beam energy scan I (BES-I) and II (BES-II), collected with the”
> —>
> “collected during the beam energy scan phase-I and II (BES-I & BES-II) programs by the”
>
> line 75: Needs correction,
> “dE/dx, in the TPC, the reconstructed momentum (p), and the squared mass, m2, from the TOF detector”
> —>
> “dE/dx, the reconstructed momentum (p) in the TPC, and the squared mass, m2, from the TOF detector”
>
> line 86:
> “Representative preliminary results….charged hadrons is presented….”
> —>
> “Preliminary results….charged hadrons are presented….”
>
> line 89: I think it will be good to mention that “such effects of tracking efficiency will be explored in the future”.
>
> line 92:
> “essentially monotonic behaviour”
> —>
> “essentially monotonic increase”
>
> line 93: Not clear what causes what. I guess you meant the radial flow increases so <pT> increases and therefore integrated v2 increases? Please clarify and revise the sentence accordingly.
>
> line 109-112: I don’t understand the context of these lines starting with “The published STAR results..”.  Do you think they are somehow related to the observation of better NCQ scaling seen for anti-particles that you mention in line 109? Please clarify. If you think so, then do mention by saying something like “these may be consistent with the previous measurement…”.
>
> Also, I guess the effect of transported quarks is one the major source for such a splitting and NCQ scaling violation.
>
> line 114:
> “allows to observe”
> —>
> “allows us to observe”
>
> Best,
> Prithwish
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2020-10-12 18:04, arkadij71 via Star-fcv-l wrote:
>> Dear Jiangyong
>> Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.
>> We implemented your suggestions and change the figure according to
>> your comments -
>> the update version of proceedings is posted.
>> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/presentations/icppa-2020/elliptic-v2-and-triangular-v3-anisotropic-flow-identified-hadrons-star-be-1
>> We did the detailed comparison for centrality dependence of pt
>> integrated v2 of charged hadrons
>> with STAR published results from paper with the same set of cuts.
>> ``Inclusive charged hadron elliptic flow in Au + Au collisions at
>> $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 - 39 GeV,''
>> Phys. Rev. C \textbf{86}, 054908 (2012) - the agreement was very good
>> for all points in collision energy.
>> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/v2integralBES.png
>> if our results are not corrected for pT dependent efficiency - does it
>> mean that the published v2 results were
>> not corrected as well - or effect is very small ?
>> Thanks a lot
>> With best regards
>> Arkadiy
>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 11:35 PM Jiangyong Jia
>> <jiangyong.jia AT stonybrook.edu> wrote:
>>> On 10/12/20 4:17 PM, arkadij71 wrote:
>>>> Dear Jiangyong
>>>> Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.
>>>> Fig.1. please indicate on figure that left is for v2 and right is
>>>> for v3
>>>> ==we updated the Figure 1 according to your suggestions
>>>> Fig.2 Are the integral v_n corrected for pT dependent tracking
>>>> efficiency? If so please indicate it in the proceedings
>>>> == we mentioned in the text that v_n values were not corrected for
>>>> pT dependent tracking efficiency
>>> It is a bit misleading to discuss the energy dependence of integral
>>> vn since the efficiency correction can change the integrated vn
>>> value. This need to be worked out for the final publication.
>>> In this case, I suggest to add a legend on the figure, "not
>>> corrected for pT dependent efficiency". Also in the text add a
>>> comment that the efficiency is pT dependent but are similar between
>>> different beam energy, so is not expected to influence the sqrt(s)
>>> trend.
>>> With this implemented, I sign off.
>>> Jiangyong
>>> Fig.5 and Fig.6 right panel are the pT integrated? you might want to
>>> put
>>> pT range on the figure. =  we put the pT range for each particle on
>>> the figure
>>> the updated version of proceedings can be found at
>> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/presentations/icppa-2020/elliptic-v2-and-triangular-v3-anisotropic-flow-identified-hadrons-star-be-1
>>> With best regards
>>> arkadiy
>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 8:15 PM Jiangyong Jia via Star-fcv-l
>>> <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>>> Dear Akardij
>>> Here is comments on the nice proceedings. It is well written and
>>> the
>>> results look great.
>>> My a few comments are on the figures.
>>> Fig.1. please indicate on figure that left is for v2 and right is
>>> for v3
>>> Fig.2 Are the integral v_n corrected for pT dependent tracking
>>> efficiency? If so please indicate it in the proceedings
>>> Fig.5 and Fig.6 right panel are the pT integrated? you might want to
>>> put
>>> pT range on the figure.
>>> Jiangyong
>>> On 10/8/20 9:13 PM, webmaster--- via Star-fcv-l wrote:
>>>> Dear star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
>>>> Arkadiy Taranenko (arkadij AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov) has submitted a
>>> material for a
>>>> review, please have a look:
>>>> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/52310
>>>> ---
>>>> 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

_______________________________________________
Star-fcv-l mailing list
Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fcv-l