STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

["Robertson, Charles William" <rober558 AT purdue.edu>]

Hello Prithwish,

Thank you for your comments and suggestions. 

I have updated the slides. 

Thanks for signing off!

https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/Dnp_Slides_4_0.pdf

-CW

---

From: Star-fcv-l <star-fcv-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov> on behalf of Prithwish Tribedy via Star-fcv-l <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2022 9:59 AM
To: STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Subject: Re: [Star-fcv-l] STAR presentation by Charles Robertson for DNP 2022 submitted for review

 

---- External Email: Use caution with attachments, links, or sharing data ----


Dear CWR,
  Nice slides. Here are my comments. With these included I sign off your
talk.

slide#1: I guess you are going to change the date of "Oct 5,2022". Add
"Supported in part by" above the DOE logo.

slide#3: "B field and J aligned" --> "B field and J are aligned"

slide#3: "second order reaction plane" --> "reaction plane"

slide#3: "Phenomenologically" is not the correct choice here. How about
"The azimuthal distribution of produced particles"

slide#4: "normalizing for multiplicit" --> "normalizing with
multiplicity" (I guess)

slide#5: Above the two equations write something like "Two different
ways of normalization"

slide#6: In this figure and the others change "Errors are statistical"
--> "Statistical uncertainties only"

slide#6: \xi is not defined anywhere. Please clearly define it on this
slide and I suggest you quote the _expression_ on other slides as well.

slide#6: "Average \Delta S" --> "Averaging \Delta S between two
sub-event", "autocorrelation, This is" --> "autocorrelation that is"

Below the two sub-bullets you have to remind again that in your new
approach the \Delta S in two sub-events are treated separately.

slide#7: Add a statement, something like "Separate \Delta S and
different treatments of normalization affect the correlation between \Xi
and N\Delta\gamma". It would also be good to say that it motivates your
ESE analysis.

slide#9: Specify the kinematics for "q_2" estimation.

slide#10: Add a conclusion line here on this slide.

slide#11: I think you should add a general line on the top like "We
propose modifications to the R-observable developed for CME search"

slide#11: I think "In previous analysis" before "STAR data" would help.

slide#11: Add "redefined width of the R-observable" or something like
that after \Xi.

Best,
Prithwish



On 2022-10-13 10:48, webmaster--- via Star-fcv-l wrote:
> Dear star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
>
> Charles Robertson (rober558 AT purdue.edu) has submitted a material for a
> review, please have a look:
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/61312
>
> Deadline: 2022-10-27
> ---
> 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