STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

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

Dear Priyanshi,

Thanks for the update.
I sign off with two minor suggestions for your consideration:

slide#4: ~1/3rd of total data on the disk
slide#15: Similar in all collision systems studied

Thanks and regards,
Subhash

On 2022-06-10 01:53 PM, psinha wrote:
> Dear Subhash,
>
> Thank you for the reference. I got confused if you wanted me to
> mention the number of events before or after the cut. I have updated
> it again to 1.3 B and the fraction of events.
>
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/presentations/SQM-2022/Elliptic-flow-strange-and-multi-strange-hadrons-isobar-collisions-√sNN-200-Ge
>
> Kindly let me know of any further suggestions.
>
> On 2022-06-10 10:51, subhash wrote:
> > Dear Priyanshi,
> >
> > You can check recent STAR isobar blind paper (PRC 105 014901) for
> > reference. We have approx. 1.9 B for Ru+Ru and 2.0 B for Zr+Zr good
> > events.
> > slide#4: Now you have changed 1.3 B to 2.0 B. Does that mean you have
> > a larger fraction of data samples in your analysis? If so, have you
> > updated all the plots with this sample of data?
> >
> > Thanks and regards,
> > Subhashs
> >
> > On 2022-06-10 11:37 AM, psinha wrote:
> > > Dear Subhash,
> > >
> > > Thank you so much for the suggestions. Following is the link to the
> > > updated slides.
> > >
> > > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/presentations/SQM-2022/Elliptic-flow-strange-and-multi-strange-hadrons-isobar-collisions-√sNN-200-Ge
> > >
> > > > slide#4: 1.3 B events, I assume this is combined Ru+Zr. Then the 50%
> > > > statement is not true. In total we have around 4B events.
> > > I had mentioned the good no. of events after cuts. It would be very
> > > helpful if you could let me know if 4B is total good events, with a
> > > reference link.
> > >
> > > Kindly let me know about any other modifications.
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > > Priyanshi Sinha
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2022-06-09 20:05, subhash wrote:
> > > > Dear Priyanshi,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the updated slides. I have a few additional comments:
> > > >
> > > > slide#4: 1.3 B events, I assume this is combined Ru+Zr. Then the 50%
> > > > statement is not true. In total we have around 4B events.
> > > > Can you update the STAR detector, we also have EPD for this dataset.
> > > > slide#11: To what extent the NCQ scaling holds, 10% or less, can you 
> > > > mention?
> > > > slide#12: In the bullet can you mention the deviation is around 2%
> > > > level? It is seen for KShort too.
> > > > You prepared a similar plot with charged hadron v2 ratio, can you 
> > > > keep
> > > > it in back up.
> > > > slide#13: Mention that the uncertainties in the ratios are combined
> > > > systematic and statistical.
> > > > slide#15: 3rd bullet, mention NCQ scaling holds to XX%
> > > > 4th bullet, mention that Elliptic flow ratio in isobar species seems
> > > > to show a deviation of XX-XX%
> > > > 5th bullet: You can split into two observations in low pT and high 
> > > > pT.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks and regards,
> > > > Subhash
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for addressing my suggestions.
> > > > On 2022-06-09 12:57 PM, psinha wrote:
> > > > > Dear Subhash,
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you for you comments. Please find the updated slides after 
> > > > > the
> > > > > implementation of the suggestions at the following link.
> > > > >
> > > > > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/presentations/SQM-2022/Elliptic-flow-strange-and-multi-strange-hadrons-isobar-collisions-√sNN-200-Ge
> > > > >
> > > > > > slide#5: Resolution figure: Indicate the TPC, Psi_{2} resolution,
> > > > > > eta-range used etc.
> > > > > > Do you apply resolution on an event by event basis or ?
> > > > >
> > > > > We use the yield-weighted resolution for every centrality instead 
> > > > > of
> > > > > event by event.
> > > > >
> > > > > > slide#12: Are there systematic uncertainties on the ratio plots on 
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > bottom panels?
> > > > > > Can you fit the ratio with a straight line and extract a number 
> > > > > > with
> > > > > > stat and syst errors?
> > > > > Yes, the statistical and systematic ratios have been added in
> > > > > quadrature in the ratio plots.
> > > > >
> > > > > > slide#13&14: Are too busy. Is there a system size dependence 
> > > > > > ordering
> > > > > > between the difference systems Cu+Cu, Isobars, Au+Au, U+U?
> > > > > I have put a plot in the backup slide (17) for all system 
> > > > > comparison.
> > > > > I may move that slide up before the ratio plots perhaps, if 
> > > > > suggested.
> > > > >
> > > > > Kindly let me know your suggestions.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sincerely,
> > > > > Priyanshi
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 2022-06-08 07:25, subhash via Star-fcv-l wrote:
> > > > > > Dear Priyanshi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Nice slides. I have following comments/suggestions for your 
> > > > > > consideration.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In general since the analysis is done on a smaller fraction of 
> > > > > > isobar
> > > > > > data, please indicate how much fraction is used and how much is 
> > > > > > left
> > > > > > to be analyzed. Please be aware that if you release these
> > > > > > preliminaries with smaller number of events, you will not be able 
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > change it until publication. Also follow our recommendations send 
> > > > > > by
> > > > > > Prithwish.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > slide#3 v2(Ru+Ru)/v2(Zr+Zr)!=1, already observed that is your 
> > > > > > right
> > > > > > most plot. Do you mean, you want to expand the study using 
> > > > > > identified
> > > > > > particles?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > slide#5: Resolution figure: Indicate the TPC, Psi_{2} resolution,
> > > > > > eta-range used etc.
> > > > > > Do you apply resolution on an event by event basis or ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > slide#6&7: All the figures, mention collision system, beam energy 
> > > > > > etc
> > > > > > informations.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > slide#10: Although we recommend to remove the Omega v2, the Xi 
> > > > > > points
> > > > > > also appears to be not smooth as function of pT, probably because 
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > statistical fluctuations.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > slide#12: Are there systematic uncertainties on the ratio plots on 
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > bottom panels?
> > > > > > Can you fit the ratio with a straight line and extract a number 
> > > > > > with
> > > > > > stat and syst errors?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > slide#13&14: Are too busy. Is there a system size dependence 
> > > > > > ordering
> > > > > > between the difference systems Cu+Cu, Isobars, Au+Au, U+U?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks and regards,
> > > > > > Subhash
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 2022-05-31 11:56 AM, webmaster--- via Star-fcv-l wrote:
> > > > > > > Dear star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Priyanshi Sinha (priyanshisinha AT students.iisertirupati.ac.in) has 
> > > > > > > submitted a
> > > > > > > material for a review, please have a look:
> > > > > > > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/59781
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > 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