STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

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

Dear Alexey,

Thanks for these comparison plots. It is not apple to apple as you have 
a different centrality class. BTW, what is the reason for your kaon data 
points to be restricted to pt ~ 1.5 GeV/c?

Please add x (and y) axis label on the left figures on slide 8.

Thanks and regards,
Subhash

On 2022-07-04 10:47 PM, Alexey Povarov wrote:
> Dear Subhash,
>
> Thank you for comments, I implemented them:
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/ASPovarov_NUCLEUS_2022_pres_ver3.pdf
>
> I compared our own NCQ scaling results with those published from:
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/publications/disappearance-partonic-collectivity-3-gev-auau-collisions-rhic
> Slides attached below.
> I think that the differences arise due to the different centrality of
> our results and published.
>
> Best regards,
> Alexey
>
> пн, 4 июл. 2022 г. в 04:01, 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

Attachment: comparison_of_NCQ_NUCLEUS_2022.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document