STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

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

Dear Subhash,
Thank you for the comments.
> > Could you remind me the reason why 19.6 GeV preliminary is limited to
> > pT ~ 3 GeV/c?
Yes, at 19.6 GeV we can go beyond 3GeV/c for some particles like KS0 but 
the preliminary is upto 3GeV.
I don't the reason why it was limited upto that range.
> > By looking at slide 9, the rising trend is not strong for 19.6 GeV,
> > relatively smooth compared to 14.6 GeV.
Yes, It looks little smooth in 0-80% but the rise is there. We have to 
check in other centralities.

> > It would be good to have non-flow studies. Since the timeline is
> > tight, one work around would be to mention in the slide that non-flow
> > estimations are underway.
Okay, I have added that in slide 12. Please have a look at the new 
version
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/CPOD_2022_slides_v3_0.pdf


On 2022-11-22 11:57, subhash wrote:
> Dear Prabhupada,
>
> Thanks for your response. I have a few follow up comments inline:
>
> On 2022-11-22 11:26 AM, pdixit wrote:
> > Dear Subhash,
> > Thanks for the comments.
> > At 19.6 GeV the preliminary result for K0S is upto 3GeV. The rising
> > trend is after 3GeV. I also had measured v2 in 19.6 GeV above 3GeV and
> > compared it with preliminary results. Please have a look at the
> > results at
> > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/v2_v3_at_19G_FCV_PWG_meeting_17_05_2022_0.pdf
> > (slide-9). The result shows the rising trend.
>
> Could you remind me the reason why 19.6 GeV preliminary is limited to
> pT ~ 3 GeV/c?
> By looking at slide 9, the rising trend is not strong for 19.6 GeV,
> relatively smooth compared to 14.6 GeV.
>
>
> > My current results is for eta gap of 0.05 and I have not changed it to
> > check the affect here. But yes the results should be sensitive to the
> > eta gap. Taking a larger eta gap between the event plane and the
> > particle track can reduce the non-flow effect. In one of my FCV
> > meeting I have presented v2 of K0S at 7.7 GeV BES-II using TPC event
> > plane and EPD event plane, where the eta gap is larger. Please have a
> > look at the plot:
> > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/epd_tpc.pdf. Here we can
> > see the results is sensitive to the eta gap. For estimating the
> > non-flow effect I think we have to use measure v2 using larger eta gap
> > (e.g using EPD event plane) and compare it with current result. But we
> > have not done it yet.
>
> It would be good to have non-flow studies. Since the timeline is
> tight, one work around would be to mention in the slide that non-flow
> estimations are underway.
>
> > Regards,
> > Prabhupada
> > On 2022-11-21 23:48, subhash wrote:
> > > Dear Prabhupada,
> > >
> > > Thanks for addressing my comments.
> > > I have one more related to KS0 v2, which you addressed in FCV list.
> > > If the rise in KS0 v2 at 14.6 GeV is likely due to non-flow, why it 
> > > is
> > > not observed at 19.6 GeV. Have you checked by playing with the
> > > eta-gaps if these points are sensitive to it or not? Have you
> > > estimated non-flow contribution?
> > >
> > > Thanks and regards,
> > > Subhash
> > >
> > > On 2022-11-21 01:24 PM, pdixit via Star-fcv-l wrote:
> > > > Dear Subhash,
> > > > Thanks for the comments and suggestions. Below is the link to the
> > > > modified slide.
> > > > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/CPOD_2022_slides_v2.pdf
> > > > > > s2: Last bullet, please also mention detector upgrades
> > > > I have mentioned that in the next slide (s3), where I am showing the
> > > > STAR detectors and PID.
> > > > > > Do you know why the phi-meson has a significantly different trend 
> > > > > > at
> > > > > > low pT, compared to others?
> > > > This is what we observed. We may need to look at other energies to
> > > > understand this trend.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Prabhupada
> > > > On 2022-11-20 17:45, subhash via Star-fcv-l wrote:
> > > > > Dear Prabhupada,
> > > > >
> > > > > Nice slides. I have a few suggestions for your consideration:
> > > > >
> > > > > Check slide numbers. They are not consistent, sometimes missing.
> > > > >
> > > > > s2: Last bullet, please also mention detector upgrades
> > > > >
> > > > > s4: Check the X-axis level on top right hidden behind the text box.
> > > > >
> > > > > s5: Mention detector name for resolution figure. Would be good if 
> > > > > you
> > > > > can enlarge the figure.
> > > > >
> > > > > s5,7 ...:  mention BES-II inside figures, rapidity range etc to be
> > > > > consistent with other figures.
> > > > >
> > > > > v_3/v_3^{3/2} ratio:
> > > > > shows weak pT dependence above pT > 1.0 GeV/c. --> shows 
> > > > > non-trivial
> > > > > pT dependence.
> > > > >
> > > > > Do you know why the phi-meson has a significantly different trend 
> > > > > at
> > > > > low pT, compared to others?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks and regards,
> > > > > Subhahs
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 2022-11-18 04:12 PM, webmaster--- via Star-fcv-l wrote:
> > > > > > Dear star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Prabhupada Dixit (prabhupadad AT iiserbpr.ac.in) has submitted a 
> > > > > > material for a
> > > > > > review, please have a look:
> > > > > > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/61707
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Deadline: 2022-11-28
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > 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
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Star-fcv-l mailing list
> > > > Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> > > > https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fcv-l