star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov

Subject: STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

List archive

Re: [Star-fcv-l] STAR presentation by Jagbir Singh for DAE HEP 2020 submitted for review

From: jagbir <jagbir AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>
To: Prithwish Tribedy <ptribedy AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>
Cc: "STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG" <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>, levanfinch AT gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Star-fcv-l] STAR presentation by Jagbir Singh for DAE HEP 2020 submitted for review
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 00:39:06 +0530

Dear Prithwish,

Thank you so much for signing off the poster.

I have updated the poster with your comments.

I have put the plots along with the poster but I will make a separate entry asap.

Thank you,

With Regards,
Jagbir Singh

On 2020-12-15 00:00, Prithwish Tribedy wrote:

Hello Jagbir,
In the interest of time and because we're not showing any new
results from what you had shown at the QM-19, I am signing-off your
poster and sending it to physics. But please go though the text once
more as there are still typos like:

"Event-by-event study of charge separation is one the obseravables"
-->
"Event-by-event study of charge separation is one of the observables"

Also, Please address if ShinIchi and others have any follow up
comments. Let's also follow up on the analysis details in the other
forum.

Finally, please make an entry for all the preliminary plots on the
STAR drupal page.

Best,
Prithwish

On 2020-12-14 12:11, jagbir wrote:

Dear Shinichi,

Please find my replies below:-

--------

Fig.5 should be rebinned to be more visible, where we do not see if
they are correlated or not.

I can update the plot.

-------

Is your Fig.6 (that was not in your QM poster) consistent with Fig.8
that was in the QM poster?
This might be the case, though. Delta_gamma is defined to be gamma(OS) -
gamma(SS), where
the difference : blue (data) - red (shuffled) in SS has somewhat larger
magnitude with negative
sign than in OS for the top DBmax, while it is larger in OS than in SS
for the middle to small
DBmax region, which could be interesting. At the end of the figure
caption of Fig.6, you say
“for each centrality”, but it is mainly "for the mid-central
collisions”, was this Fig.6 approved for
preliminary in the last QM?, sorry I do not remember, since you did not
store them in the database…

Yes, Fig. 6 is consistent with Fig. 8. For QM-19 gamma OS and gamma SS
were approved by PWG, But
in the poster only delta gamma was present. At that time we plotted
gamma SS/OS in two different figures. Here I clubbed both same sign
gamma and opposite sign gamma in one figure.

--------

In Fig.7, you say it’s linear, but it’s curving up to me. Why do you
only show SS in this Fig.7? Since
this is just for the top 10% of DBmax, so these 8 points are for the 8
centrality bins?

Here in this figure we want to say that as the fractional dumbbell
charge separation increases, the gamma SS/OS increases for top 10 % of
Db+-max. Yes, 8 points are for 8 centralities taking only the top (top
10% Db+-max) point in each centrality

-------

In Fig.9, why did you choose to show only the BG subtraction with
shuffling, where you
were showing both subtractions with shuffling and random flow for your
QM poster.

Yes, at that time we were considering background from Random events
after adding flow.
But now we are considering background from charge reshuffle and correlated bkg.
Thats why I have shown only charge reshuffle in the fcme plot.

------

Thank you,

With Regards,
Jagbir Singh

On 2020-12-14 20:33, ShinIchi Esumi wrote:

Dear Jagbir
Fig.5 should be rebinned to be more visible, where we do not see if
they are correlated or not.
Is your Fig.6 (that was not in your QM poster) consistent with Fig.8
that was in the QM poster?
This might be the case, though. Delta_gamma is defined to be gamma(OS)
- gamma(SS), where
the difference : blue (data) - red (shuffled) in SS has somewhat
larger magnitude with negative
sign than in OS for the top DBmax, while it is larger in OS than in SS
for the middle to small
DBmax region, which could be interesting. At the end of the figure
caption of Fig.6, you say
“for each centrality”, but it is mainly "for the mid-central
collisions”, was this Fig.6 approved for
preliminary in the last QM?, sorry I do not remember, since you did
not store them in the database…
In Fig.7, you say it’s linear, but it’s curving up to me. Why do you
only show SS in this Fig.7? Since
this is just for the top 10% of DBmax, so these 8 points are for the 8
centrality bins? In Fig.9, why
did you choose to show only the BG subtraction with shuffling, where
you were showing both
subtractions with shuffling and random flow for your QM poster.
Best regards, ShinIchi

2020/12/14 16:43、jagbir <jagbir AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>のメール:

Dear all,

I tried to send email to FCV list earlier but for me, sometime its not working. I am sorry if you recieved the same email again. I have updated the delta gamma, gamma and fcme plot from QM-19 keeping only data and charge reshuffle. Please let me know for further comments and suggestions, The link to the updated poster is:
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/53026

Thank you,
Jagbir Singh

On 2020-12-14 09:24, jagbir via Star-fcv-l wrote:

Dear Prithwish,
I have updated the Db distribution plot ( QM-19 plot ).
I have updated the gamma and delta gamma plots by removing the
correlated background.
I have re-plotted the f_cme plot from QM-19 containing the information
only from charge reshuffle background.
Please let me know about any further comments/suggestions.
The link to the updated poster is:
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/53026
The poster presentation for DAE is on 15th December after lunch, i.e.,
15 December midnight (BNL time).
Thank you,
Jagbir Singh
On 2020-12-13 09:29, Prithwish Tribedy wrote:

Hi Jagbir,
Just to follow up on ShinIchi's suggestions. Since there's very
little time before the conference and there are many questions --
would it be possible for you to replace some of the new preliminary
results with what you showed at the QM, in particular the plot on
f_CME :
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/QM_Poster_Jagbir_v7.pdf
But do include a para (or more) and details on your ongoing study with
the STAR data. We need more time to show new plots but we can
definitely update on the progress at this conference by saying a few
words. This way we will be able to approve your poster presentation
which is only 3-4 days away.
Best,
Prithwish
On 2020-12-12 18:03, ShinIchi Esumi wrote:

Dear Jagbir
There has already been some preliminary plots that were shown in your poster
for the last QM, these results were different from this, so you can
not change/update
until you go to the final publication, unless there are some obvious
errors in the analysis,
which needs to be discussed in the PWG and cleared/agreed on what to
do. As Fuqiang
also pointed out, in addition to the unanswered questions, you did not
answer to my
questions/comments/suggestions yet…
Best regards, ShinIchi

On Dec 13, 2020, at 4:26, Wang, Fuqiang <fqwang AT purdue.edu> wrote:
Hi Jagbir, All,
I'm very concerned about these results being presented outside STAR as preliminary physics results. There are many unanswered questions (e.g. my email several weeks ago was not answered) and many of the technical issues people raised during your last CME focus group meeting discussion need to be looked into (I will write in a separate email my follow-up questions to your email to CMEfg yesterday). I would be fine if your poster is to discuss a technical method to search for the CME, but I'd be very worried that any physics results be presented as STAR preliminary.
Best regards,
Fuqiang

-----Original Message-----
From: Star-fcv-l <star-fcv-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov> On Behalf Of jagbir via Star-
fcv-l
Sent: Wednesday, December 9, 2020 9:32 PM
To: STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>;
ptribedy AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov; esumi.shinichi.gn AT u.tsukuba.ac.jp;
jiangyong.jia AT stonybrook.edu
Subject: Re: [Star-fcv-l] STAR presentation by Jagbir Singh for DAE HEP 2020
submitted for review
Hi all,
Sorry for uploading the poster very late.
I request you to please review the poster and give your comments and
suggestions.
The conference is on 14 December.
the link to the poster is here below:
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/53026
Thank you,
Regards,
Jagbir Singh
On 2020-12-09 23:33, webmaster--- via Star-fcv-l wrote:

Dear star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
Jagbir Singh (jagbir1593 AT gmail.com) has submitted a material for a
review, please have a look:
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/53026
---
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

Re: [Star-fcv-l] STAR presentation by Jagbir Singh for DAE HEP 2020 submitted for review , (continued)