star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov
Subject: STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG
List archive
Re: [Star-fcv-l] STAR presentation by Priyanshi Sinha for SQM 2022 submitted for review
- From: psinha <psinha AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>
- To: subhash <subhash AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>
- Cc: "STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG" <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
- Subject: Re: [Star-fcv-l] STAR presentation by Priyanshi Sinha for SQM 2022 submitted for review
- Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2022 12:13:56 +0530
Dear Subhash,
Thank you for all the suggestions. I have implemented the same and updated the slides on the same link.
Sincerely,
Priyanshi
On 2022-06-10 11:59, subhash wrote:
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%I had mentioned the good no. of events after cuts. It would be very
statement is not true. In total we have around 4B events.
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 theYes, the statistical and systematic ratios have been added in
bottom panels?
Can you fit the ratio with a straight line and extract a number with
stat and syst errors?
quadrature in the ratio plots.
slide#13&14: Are too busy. Is there a system size dependence orderingI have put a plot in the backup slide (17) for all system comparison.
between the difference systems Cu+Cu, Isobars, Au+Au, U+U?
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
-
Re: [Star-fcv-l] STAR presentation by Priyanshi Sinha for SQM 2022 submitted for review,
subhash, 06/07/2022
-
Re: [Star-fcv-l] STAR presentation by Priyanshi Sinha for SQM 2022 submitted for review,
psinha, 06/09/2022
-
Re: [Star-fcv-l] STAR presentation by Priyanshi Sinha for SQM 2022 submitted for review,
subhash, 06/09/2022
-
Message not available
-
Message not available
-
Message not available
-
Re: [Star-fcv-l] STAR presentation by Priyanshi Sinha for SQM 2022 submitted for review,
subhash, 06/10/2022
- Re: [Star-fcv-l] STAR presentation by Priyanshi Sinha for SQM 2022 submitted for review, psinha, 06/10/2022
-
Re: [Star-fcv-l] STAR presentation by Priyanshi Sinha for SQM 2022 submitted for review,
subhash, 06/10/2022
-
Message not available
-
Message not available
-
Message not available
-
Re: [Star-fcv-l] STAR presentation by Priyanshi Sinha for SQM 2022 submitted for review,
subhash, 06/09/2022
-
Re: [Star-fcv-l] STAR presentation by Priyanshi Sinha for SQM 2022 submitted for review,
psinha, 06/09/2022
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.