STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

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

Dear Alexey,

Thanks for the updated slides and the link. I have two comments:

One general comment is that you have a mix of BES-I and BES-II results 
across your slides. Although you mention it in slide#4, but if someone 
look at individual figures, they might not have this information. So if 
you could mention in individual relevant slides, for example e.g. 27 GeV 
(BES-II), that might be helpful.

27 GeV BES-II NCQ scaling for pi, K and p v2 in 10-40% centrality is 
recently published here: 
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/publications/disappearance-partonic-collectivity-3-gev-auau-collisions-rhic
I saw that you don't have an overlap of centrality with this published 
paper, but is there a way you can compare with these results, just for a 
consistency check?

I sign off, once these are addressed.

Thanks and regards,
Subhash



On 2022-07-02 12:01 AM, Alexey Povarov wrote:
> Dear Subhash,
>
> Thank you for your comments.
>
> These v2 and v3 measurements have already been shown and have received
> the status of preliminary. Here is the link to the v2 and v3
> preliminary:
>
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/gnigmat/v2-and-v3-preliminary
> In our analysis we used 27 GeV from BES-II and other energies from
> BES-I. I added this on slide#4.
>
> > slide#5: It would be good to indicate BES-I vs BES-II. For BES-I
> resolutions, are you using published values or, are they from your own
> analysis?
> > slide#6: Are these v2 values from published results? If yes, please
> add the journal reference.
>
> We used event plane resolutions and v2 values from our own analysis.
> > slide#7: How do you calculate integrated v2, would be good to
> indicate them like you do on slide#6. Do you use corrected pt spectra
> for example?
> I added the definition of v_int like on slide#6. We have not applied
> any corrections for these values.
> > slide#9: Is there a way you can quantify the quality of scaling?
>
> We are working on it and it will be discussed at the PWG when results
> will be ready.
> I implemented your comments. You can find slides here:
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/ASPovarov_NUCLEUS_2022_pres_ver2_0.pdf
>
> Best regards,
> Alexey
>
> пт, 1 июл. 2022 г. в 05:35, subhash <subhash AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>:
>
> > Dear Alexey,
> >
> > Nice results. I have following comments to your slides:
> >
> > You have three duplicate entries in Drupal. I am discarding the
> > following ones:
> > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/60123
> > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/60124
> >
> > General:
> > Is this triangular flow measurements are new preliminaries that will
> > be
> > shown for the first time? If yes, could you please provide us a
> > document
> > with a following format:
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/Prelim_Request_template.pdf
> > It would be good into indicate BES-I/BES-II in all the relevant
> > results
> > and slides. Recently STAR released a lot of BES-II measurements, so
> > it
> > would help distinguish BES-I and BES-II.
> >
> > Title: You can indicate BES-I here as well.
> >
> > slide#3: Probably you can apply formatting to the bullets, so the
> > words
> > will have equal spacing.
> > baryons then mesons --> baryons than mesons
> >
> > slide#5: It would be good to indicate BES-I vs BES-II. For BES-I
> > resolutions, are you using published values or, are they from your
> > own
> > analysis?
> >
> > slide#6: Are these v2 values from published results? If yes, please
> > add
> > the journal reference.
> > "Elliptic flow is more dependent on centrality than triangular flow"
> > -->
> > Elliptic flow has stronger dependence on centrality than triangular
> > flow
> >
> > slide#7: How do you calculate integrated v2, would be good to
> > indicate
> > them like you do on slide#6. Do you use corrected pt spectra for
> > example?
> >
> > slide#8: Indicate BES-I and BES-II in relevant figures.
> > First measurement of identified particle v3 at BES energies.
> >
> > slide#9: You can also add scaling holds better for particles than
> > anti-particles. Is there a way you can quantify the quality of
> > scaling?
> >
> > slide#10&11: positively charged particle species
> >
> > v3 results (not corrected for efficiency) --> Do you expect any
> > significant change in v3 due to application of efficiency. If not,
> > you
> > can change this "not corrected for efficiency" to a normal (not
> > bold)
> > font.
> >
> > Thanks and regards,
> > Subhash
> >
> > On 2022-06-30 05:53 AM, webmaster--- via Star-fcv-l wrote:
> > > Dear star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
> > >
> > > Alexey Povarov (povarovas AT gmail.com) has submitted a material for
> > a
> > > review,
> > > please have a look:
> > > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/60125
> > >
> > > ---
> > > 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