STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

[niseem <niseem AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>]

Hi Jiangyong,

Thanks for the nice comments, please find the updated draft at the same 
link,

https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/presentations/dnp-2020/beam-energy-dependence-flow-correlations-heavy-ion-collisions

Thanks,
Niseem

On 2020-10-22 07:15, Jiangyong Jia wrote:
> 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