STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

["Md. Nasim" <mnasim2008 AT gmail.com>]

The correct link to the paper draft: https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/prc_v0.pdf

On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 11:16 PM Md. Nasim <mnasim2008 AT gmail.com> wrote:

Dear All,

                We have prepared the analysis note and paper draft. Please follow the links.

paper draft:  https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/PWGC_54.pdf

Analysis note: https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/analysis_note_2.pdf

Webpage: https://www.star.bnl.gov/protected/lfsupc/nasim/webpage_54gev/

Your comments and suggestions are welcome.

Thank,

Nasim (for PAs)

On Sat, May 29, 2021 at 12:21 AM Takafumi Niida via Star-fcv-l <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Date: 5/28/2021

Participants: Prabhupada Dixit, Shaowei Lan, Md. Nasim, Shusu Shi,
Barbara Trzeciak, Daniel Brandenburg, Daniel Cebra, ShinIchi Esumi, Hanna Zbroszczyk, Maria Zurek, Matt Posik, Prithwish Tribedy, Qinghua Xu, Raghav Elayavalli, Hanseul Oh, Yi Yang, Rongrong Ma, Takafumi Niida

Title: Elliptic and triangular flow of (multi-)strange hadrons in Au+Au collisions at sqrt(sNN) = 54.4 GeV
PAs: Prabhupada Dixit, Shaowei Lan, Md. Nasim, Shusu Shi
Target journal: PRC
Proposal page: https://www.star.bnl.gov/protected/lfsupc/nasim/webpage_54gev/
Presentation: https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/paper_proposal_54gev_pwgc_0.pdf

The PWGC panel previewed the paper from FCV PWG. The panel found that the analysis is mature and the paper should move forward with the proposed journal. Physics conclusions should be strengthen with possible comparisons with theoretical models. The following points were discussed during the meeting.

s2: Do proton and phi v2 cross at high pT? Even at 1.5 GeV, the ratio looks below 1.
A. Yes, it crosses at higher pT, like >2 GeV.

s8: The total systematic uncertainties look larger than rough estimate from each plots. Please double-check.
A. PAs will check again.

Fig. 5:
Q. The choice of fitting to Ks0 has any physics oriented reason? Depending on which particle you choose, the visibility will look quite different.
A. Most precise data, i.e. K0s, was selected for baseline.

Q. NCQ scaled Lambda v3 is deviated from the global trend at low pT (not so significant at v2). Any intuitive explanation?
A. Not really. PAs are also not sure if the feed-down is responsible for it.

C. Especially the lower is crowded. Please consider to draw Lambda and K0s in 3rd panel for better visibility.

Fig. 6 and 7: Why there is difference between particles and anti-particles in general?
A. Transport quarks would have more interactions since they exist in the initial state, which leads to larger flow, while anti-particles contain more produced quarks (anti-quarks).
C. See arXiv:1107.3078 by Jamie, Mike and Paul.

Fig. 9:
Q. "Mass ordering violation” comes from 1 lowest data point with only ~1sigma effect, right?
A. Yes. Therefore PAs used the word “Hint”.

Q. The ratio for more central data is smaller. Should we expect this?
A. protons are more affected by hadron rescattering and therefore the ratio becomes smaller

Q. There is centrality dependence at 54 GeV but no energy dependence compared to 200 GeV. Should we expect larger for 200 GeV?
A. There will be competing effects between partonic and hadronic interactions. At higher energy, partonic interaction would become large.

Q. Why anti-proton was chosen here while proton was used in previous study as shown in slide 2?
A. At 200 GeV, almost no difference between p and pbar. At 54 GeV, to avoid transported protons, pbar was used.

Q. Why 0-10% is not shown while 0-80% data is shown in the right panel?
A. Due to large error for phi, PAs didn’t include it.
C. No reason to hide the data. It would be better to present.

C. Would be better to have pi, K, p in Fig. 9 as well as in other figures.
A. pi, k, p data are ongoing with another GPC with 3 GeV. Will check the status with Shaowei.

Q. Any plan to have model comparison?
A. Currently no.
C. PAs should ask theorists and see if the calculations can be obtained within a reasonable time scale.

Q. What is the importance to look at 54 GeV?
A. There would be a transition between partonic and hadronic phases and the dynamics may also change.

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

--

Thanks,

With Best Regards,

Nasim

--

Thanks,

With Best Regards,

Nasim