STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

[Jiangyong Jia <jiangyong.jia AT stonybrook.edu>]

On 10/22/20 1:22 AM, niseem wrote:
> Dear ShinIchi,
>
> Please find the updated slides at this link, I used the same 200 data
> points as Chunjian.
>
>
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/presentations/dnp-2020/beam-energy-dependence-flow-correlations-heavy-ion-collisions
>
>
Hi, Niseem,

There seems to be a factor of 2 missing in the plot. The theory should
be larger than the data, but they are smaller in your new plot.

Jiangyong
> Thanks,
> Niseem
>
>
> On 2020-10-21 23:11, Jiangyong Jia via Star-fcv-l wrote:
>> On 10/22/20 12:05 AM, niseem via Star-fcv-l wrote:
>>> Dear Shengli and All,
>>>
>>> I agree with ShinIchi about using one set of data points for now.
>>> However, I disagree with your concern about the Delta eta cut. I did
>>> preset it in detail in the pwg meeting and I showed that the cut
>>> effect saturates at some point if its statistical fluctuations affect
>>> the Ck value will keep changeing with the D-eta cut.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Niseem
>>>
>> Shengli and Niseem,
>>
>> For preliminary result, it probably is ok.
>>
>> The statistical uncertainty on ck is negligible for Pearson correlator
>> (which is dominated by the covariance). the ck value itself agrees well
>> with subevent method
>>
>> In my opinion, it is sufficient to show the 200 GeV result from Chunjian
>> and 27 and 54 GeV from Niseem, this is a good compromise.  Further
>> investigation on the statistical uncertainty of ck can be followed up
>> later.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Jiangyong
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2020-10-21 22:54, Shengli Huang via Star-fcv-l wrote:
>>>> Dear All,
>>>>      I also have the same concern. STAR only allows one version of
>>>> preliminary for one data set. We can change it or update it but only
>>>> one version is allowed to exist.  We can not show two kinds of
>>>> preliminary in the same conference even the cuts are different.
>>>>      I also have the concern for eta gap cut for ck for Niseem's
>>>> results. This eta gap cut will generate non-zero statistical
>>>> fluctuations. So the signal will include both dynamics fluctuations
>>>> and statistical fluctuations. It does not make sense.  We should make
>>>> sure the statistical fluctuation to be zero is ck!
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>> Shengli
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 11:42 PM ShinIchi Esumi via Star-fcv-l
>>>> <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear Niseem (and Chunjian)
>>>>> So both of you would need this 1- and 3- sub comparison plot in your
>>>>> backup,
>>>>> if you two are using the different cuts at the end for the different
>>>>> comparisons
>>>>> in these two talks focusing on the somewhat different topics with
>>>>> the same variable,
>>>>> which would be reasonable. But after all, if you decide to use the
>>>>> same cuts/selections
>>>>> for both talks, I think it would be better to use the same data
>>>>> points (just for 200GeV
>>>>> AuAu points) between the two talks, if that is indeed consistent
>>>>> between the two with
>>>>> the same cuts, one can use the one of them for both talks? I thought
>>>>> this would be
>>>>> the rule for the preliminary, since we approve the data points, or?
>>>>> Best regards, ShinIchi
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Oct 21, 2020, at 8:51, niseem <niseem AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear ShinIchi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please find the comparison attached, Niseem’s results are
>>>>> using 3-subevents Chunjiang’s results A is 3-subevents and B is
>>>>> 1-subevents
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear Niseem (and Chunjian)
>>>>>> I heard that you (Niseem) have made the change on your cuts (in
>>>>> order to make it exactly same as Chunjiang’s cuts) for all your
>>>>> plots including other beam energy points. Is that true?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, all results are reproduced with the same cuts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However I still see them qualitatively different between your plot
>>>>> on P11 lower-right panel AuAu 200GeV data and Chunjian’s plot on
>>>>> P9 left panel in his slide. We would just like to see them overlaid
>>>>> in the same panel with the same x-y axis definition, as they could
>>>>> have some differences depending on the choice of the normalization
>>>>> or some other different cuts/selections.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please note that in Niseem’s slides only 3-subevents are used,
>>>>> however in Chunjian’s plot on P9 1-subevent being used. We update
>>>>> the plot to compare 1- and 3-subevents between Niseem and Chunjian.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is good to see them consistent after making the same
>>>>> choice/selection, however it is also important to understand and
>>>>> demonstrate how different they are with these different cuts as
>>>>> well, which is just like showing the delta_eta dependence of your
>>>>> results.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The delta eta dependence is a separate question. But right now,
>>>>> we choose to use the same delta eta cut. As you can see with the
>>>>> same delta eta cut the difference is too small and covered by the
>>>>> systematics. The analysis is not based on the same code and exactly
>>>>> the same procedure
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Niseem
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2020-10-20 12:33, ShinIchi Esumi via Star-fcv-l wrote:
>>>>>>> Dear Niseem (and Chunjian)
>>>>>>> I heard that you (Niseem) have made the change on your cuts (in
>>>>> order to make
>>>>>>> it exactly same as Chunjiang’s cuts) for all your plots
>>>>> including other beam
>>>>>>> energy points. Is that true? However I still see them
>>>>> qualitatively
>>>>>>> different between
>>>>>>> your plot on P11 lower-right panel AuAu 200GeV data and
>>>>> Chunjian’s plot on P9
>>>>>>> left panel in his slide. We would just like to see them overlaid
>>>>> in
>>>>>>> the same panel with
>>>>>>> the same x-y axis definition, as they could have some differences
>>>>> depending on
>>>>>>> the choice of the normalization or some other different
>>>>>>> cuts/selections. It is good to
>>>>>>> see them consistent after making the same choice/selection,
>>>>> however it is also
>>>>>>> important to understand and demonstrate how different they are
>>>>> with
>>>>>>> these different
>>>>>>> cuts as well, which is just like showing the delta_eta dependence
>>>>> of
>>>>>>> your results.
>>>>>>> I do think they are needed to make both your talks approved.
>>>>>>> Best regards, ShinIchi
>>>>>>>> On Oct 21, 2020, at 1:33, ShinIchi Esumi via Star-fcv-l
>>>>> <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I’m asking you to show both comparisons with and without
>>>>> adjusting the cuts.
>>>>>>>> The comparison without adjusting cuts means the direct
>>>>> comparison between
>>>>>>>> the two preliminary results (with different cuts), which will be
>>>>> shown in the DNP.
>>>>>>>> The comparison with the same cut has already been shown in the
>>>>> PWG.
>>>>>>>>> On Oct 20, 2020, at 18:42, Niseem via Star-fcv-l
>>>>> <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi ShinIchi,
>>>>>>>>> I and Chunjiang used the same method and cuts to get the same
>>>>> results.
>>>>>>>>> Please find the updated slides at the same link.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/presentations/dnp-2020/beam-energy-dependence-flow-correlations-heavy-ion-collisions
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The comparisons between my results and Chunjiang's results are
>>>>> in the backup slides.
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> Niseem
>>>>>>>>> On 10/17/20 11:04 PM, ShinIchi Esumi via Star-fcv-l wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Dear Niseem (and Chunjiang)
>>>>>>>>>> I would sing-off your nice talk with some comments.
>>>>>>>>>> Please have a comparison plot in your backup between you and
>>>>> Chunjiang with the
>>>>>>>>>> same data set 200GeV AuAu, one with your own choice of
>>>>> analysis cut (especially for
>>>>>>>>>> delta_eta and sub-event cuts on covariance and two variances)
>>>>> as well as another one
>>>>>>>>>> with a common set of eta_gap and sub-event cuts for both of
>>>>> the analysis.
>>>>>>>>>> After you prepare the preliminary summary page with all your
>>>>> preliminary plots to be linked
>>>>>>>>>> at special drupal area for the preliminary location with
>>>>> necessary information at :
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/pwg/bulk-correlations/bulkcorr-preliminary-summary
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> then I would approve your talk.
>>>>>>>>>> Best regards, ShinIchi
>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 15, 2020, at 1:15, webmaster--- via Star-fcv-l
>>>>> <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Dear star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
>>>>>>>>>>> Niseem Magdy Abdelwahab Abdelrahman (niseemmagdy AT yahoo.com)
>>>>> has submitted a
>>>>>>>>>>> material for a review, please have a look:
>>>>>>>>>>> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/52367
>>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> Niseem Magdy Abdelrahman, Ph.D.,
>>>>>>>>> Postdoctoral Research Associate
>>>>>>>>> Department of Physics
>>>>>>>>> University of Illinois at Chicago
>>>>>>>>> 2236 Science and Engineering South
>>>>>>>>> 845 West Taylor Street, Chicago, Illinois 60607
>>>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>> <Comp_AB.pdf>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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