STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

["Wang, Fuqiang" <fqwang AT purdue.edu>]

Hi Prithwish,

Thanks for the summary. These look good to me. I agree with Jiangyong's 
message. The analysis specific QA variables are good to flag the runs but not 
actually cut them.

Best regards,
Fuqiang



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Star-fcv-l <star-fcv-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov> On Behalf Of Prithwish
> Tribedy via Star-fcv-l
> Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 10:09 AM
> To: STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
> Subject: Re: [Star-fcv-l] Inputs for run-by-run QA variables for new data 
> sets
> 
> Hello Everyone,
>    Just to wrap up this discussion. Below are the list. We need to send 
> this before
> 12 pm today.
> Best,
> Prithwish
> 
> 
> A) QA variables for centrality determination (for collaboration wide bad
> runs):
> 1. <RefMult>
> 2. <η>
> 3. <φ>
> 4. <DCA>
> 5. <nHitsFit>
> 6. <Vz>
> 
> B) Analysis specific QA variables can be used to flag a bad run and also
> determine jumps:
> 
> 1. <TOFMatch> 2. <TOFMult> 3. <Q1xTPC> 4.
> <Q1yTPC> 3. <Q2xTPC> 4. <Q2yTPC> 5. <Q1xEPD> 6. <Q1yEPD> 7. <Q2xEPD> 8.
> <Q2yEPD> 9. <Q1xZDC> 10. <Q1yZDC> 11. <X>_{ZDC} 11. <Y>_{ZDC} 11.
> <Q1xBBC> 11. <Q1yBBC> 11. <Q2xBBC> 11. <Q2yBBC> 9. <EPDEHits> 10.
> <EPDWHits>
> 
> C) Physics variables (only for monitoring):
> 1. <pT>
> 
> 
> 
> On 2021-10-21 13:49, Prithwish Tribedy via Star-fcv-l wrote:
> > Hi Fuqiang,
> >
> > On 2021-10-21 13:09, Wang, Fuqiang wrote:
> >> Hi Prithwish, All,
> >>
> >> I wouldn't include <pT> and <TOFMatch>. The <pT> is too physics
> >> specific. <TOFMatch> is useful for pileup rejection but seems too
> >> excessive at the general QA level.
> >>
> >
> >   Thanks for your input. I agree <pT> should be removed and TOFMatch
> > is TOF variable not a TPC one so it can also be removed.
> >
> >
> >> I wouldn't include any in list B) as FCV-wide QA variables. I think
> >> these should be analysis specific.
> >>
> >> I understand the rationale behind a more formal collaboration-wide QA
> >> and it has merits. But it may also have the unwanted consequences that
> >> 1) one size doesn't fit all, and 2) analyzers may become too relying
> >> on general QA and neglecting needed analysis-specific QA.
> >>
> >
> > I would probably agree with you but this is not enough. We need a
> > better strategy/argument on how to avoid bias. We have seen in the
> > past that one can get completely different physics conclusion just by
> > selectively removing some runs from the analysis. Maybe you can join
> > tomorrow and bring up your argument.
> >
> > Best,
> > Prithwish
> >
> >
> >> Best regards,
> >> Fuqiang
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Star-fcv-l <star-fcv-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov> On Behalf Of
> >>> Prithwish
> >>> Tribedy via Star-fcv-l
> >>> Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2021 12:18 PM
> >>> To: STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
> >>> Subject: Re: [Star-fcv-l] Inputs for run-by-run QA variables for new
> >>> data sets
> >>>
> >>> Hello Everyone,
> >>>    Can we please finalize a list of QA variables by today and send it
> >>> to Ashik and
> >>> team before tomorrow's QA board meeting. Here is my proposal, please
> >>> chime
> >>> in:
> >>>
> >>> A) QA variables for centrality determination (for collaboration wide
> >>> bad
> >>> runs):
> >>> 1. <RefMult>
> >>> 2. <TOFMatch>
> >>> 3. <pT> (I am not sure about this)
> >>> 4. <η>
> >>> 5. <φ>
> >>> 6. <DCA>
> >>> 7. <nHitsFit>
> >>> 8. <Vz>
> >>>
> >>> B) QA variables for FCV analyses (for region of stable run and
> >>> analysis specific
> >>> bad runs):
> >>>
> >>> 1. Everything used in centrality determination 2. <TOFMult> 3.
> >>> <Q1xTPC> 4.
> >>> <Q1yTPC> 3. <Q2xTPC> 4. <Q2yTPC> 5. <Q1xEPD> 6. <Q1yEPD> 7. <Q2xEPD>
> >>> 8.
> >>> <Q2yEPD> 9. <Q1xZDC> 10. <Q1yZDC> 11. <X>_{ZDC} 11. <Y>_{ZDC} 11.
> >>> <Q1xBBC> 11. <Q1yBBC> 11. <Q2xBBC> 11. <Q2yBBC> 9. <EPDEHits> 10.
> >>> <EPDWHits>
> >>>
> >>> Anything else?
> >>> Best,
> >>> Prithwish
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 2021-10-17 21:33, ASHIK IKBAL via Star-fcv-l wrote:
> >>> > Dear Shinlchi,
> >>> >
> >>> > Thanks for pointing this out. We can add <phi> and the vertex related
> >>> > quantity,<dca> in the QA list. We will have separate bad run list for
> >>> > centrality determination and also for the physics analyses as
> >>> > clarified by Rongrong in his email.
> >>> >
> >>> > The reason for adding the Q-vectors in the list is the following. We
> >>> > see there is a run ID dependence of the Q-vectors. The Q-vectors are
> >>> > really necessary for flow analyses, and hence has been added in the QA
> >>> > variable list.
> >>> >
> >>> > Therefore, the idea of this discussion is to get suggestions about the
> >>> > QA variables that are sensitive to centrality determination as well as
> >>> > physics analyses from the PWG.
> >>> >
> >>> > Best,
> >>> > Ashik
> >>> >
> >>> > On Sun, Oct 17, 2021 at 1:33 PM ShinIchi Esumi via Star-fcv-l
> >>> > <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> Dear Ashik and all
> >>> >> Thanks for the initiation. I have a few comments and questions.
> >>> >> I was wondering why you have chosen to use Q-vectors in stead of more
> >>> >> direct average <phi> at least for TPC, since you do have also average
> >>> >> <eta> and <pT>.
> >>> >> But maybe Q-vector would  be directly used by the analysis, and could
> >>> >> be more sensitive to the location of dead azimuthal sector than
> >>> >> <phi>, so it might be more reasonable as well, though. Another
> >>> >> question is about the vertex qualities, such as run-by-run average
> >>> >> vertex position in radial/xy and z direction?
> >>> >> The “average
> >>> >> DCAxy/z in each event” was also found to be a good indicator for
> >>> >> removing bad events in BES1 especially for central events in
> >>> >> fluctuation analysis, so I was also wondering if run-by-run selection
> >>> >> based on such DCA related information as well, but this might be too
> >>> >> much for the current initial QA studies especially for the general
> >>> >> centrality. Thanks again.
> >>> >> Best regards, ShinIchi
> >>> >>
> >>> >>> On Oct 18, 2021, at 1:49, Prithwish Tribedy via Star-fcv-l
> >>> >> <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Hi Ashik and all,
> >>> >>> During our isobar analysis we compiled a list of observables.
> >>> >> This may give us some clue about which quantities are important:
> >>> >>>
> >>> >> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/summary_qa_step2.html
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> I would still encourage people to provide input before Friday.
> >>> >>> Best,
> >>> >>> Prithwish
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> On 2021-10-17 12:36, ASHIK IKBAL via Star-fcv-l wrote:
> >>> >>>> Hi FCV folks,
> >>> >>>> We had a discussion on the QA variables for new and upcoming data
> >>> >> sets
> >>> >>>> in the last week QA board meeting. So far we (the QA team) are
> >>> >> using
> >>> >>>> the following variables for 19.6 GeV run-by-run QA analysis:
> >>> >>>> 1       runidvsrefmult
> >>> >>>> 2       runidvstofmatched
> >>> >>>> 3       runidvsavgpt
> >>> >>>> 4       runidvsavgeta
> >>> >>>> 5       runidvsavgQ1x
> >>> >>>> 6       runidvsavgQ1y
> >>> >>>> 7       runidvsavgQ2x
> >>> >>>> 8       runidvsavgQ2y
> >>> >>>> 9       runidvsavgEpdQ1x
> >>> >>>> 10      runidvsavgEpdQ1y
> >>> >>>> 11      runidvsavgEpdQ2x
> >>> >>>> 12      runidvsavgEpdQ2y
> >>> >>>> 13.             runidvsbemcmatched
> >>> >>>> The list of  badruns (identified based on the QA variables using
> >>> >>>> automated run-by-run QA algorithm) is really necessary for the
> >>> >>>> centrality team. The QA board has set a deadline of next Friday
> >>> >> (Oct.
> >>> >>>> 22) to finalize the variables.
> >>> >>>> Please speak up if anyone wants to look at any other variables
> >>> >> for the
> >>> >>>> run-by-run QA analysis.
> >>> >>>> Thanks,
> >>> >>>> Ashik
> >>> >>>> --
> >>> >>>> Ashik Ikbal
> >>> >>>> Research Associate
> >>> >>>> Kent State University
> >>> >>>> Department Of Physics
> >>> >>>> Kent, OH 44242, USA
> >>> >>>> Contact no.s: +1 631-504-7647 (USA)
> >>> >>>> +91 8250216234 (India)
> >>> >>>> Alternate e-mails: asheikh2 AT kent.edu ashik AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov
> >>> >>>> ashik.ikbal.sheikh AT cern.ch
> >>> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>> >>>> 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
> >>> >  --
> >>> >
> >>> > Ashik Ikbal
> >>> >
> >>> > Research Associate
> >>> > Kent State University
> >>> > Department Of Physics
> >>> >
> >>> > Kent, OH 44242, USA
> >>> >
> >>> > Contact no.s: +1 631-504-7647 (USA)
> >>> >
> >>> >                       +91 8250216234 (India)
> >>> >
> >>> > Alternate e-mails: asheikh2 AT kent.edu
> >>> >                              ashik AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov
> >>> >                              ashik.ikbal.sheikh AT cern.ch
> >>> > _______________________________________________
> >>> > 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