STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

[webmaster AT star.bnl.gov]

Dear star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,

Prithwish Tribedy ( ptribedy AT bnl.gov ) has commented on a material originally 
 
submitted by Shengli Huang ( shengli.huang AT stonybrook.edu ) at
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/presentations/2023/Systematic-study-flow-harmonics-di-hadron-correlations-mid-rapidity-pAu-dAu-and-2

Comment:
Very nice slides. A few comments from my side for the next version.

Initial Geometry in small system --> Initial Geometry in Small System

Slide#2:
"middle" --> "midrapidity"
"forward" --> "forward rapidity"

Slide#3:
"Nuclear vs Sub-Nuclear fluctuation" --> "Nucleon vs. Sub-nucleonic  
fluctuations"

Slide#4:
Due to longitudinal decorrelation, flow measurements between mid-forward  
rapidity correlation cannot directly determine the initial geometry
-->
The longitudinal decorrelation from mid to forward rapidity complicates the  
inference of the true initial geometry

"higher order flows" --> "higher order anisotropy coefficients"

Add in red bold below the plot "Decorrelation poses challenges for all  
boost-invariant hydro model-to-data comparisons."

Slide#5:
"Pre-Flow effect will change the v_3 magnitude and hierarchy"
  --> "Pre-Flow effect will change the v_3 magnitude and dilute system  
hierarchy

Slide#6:
On this slide: cite the STAR and PHENIX papers:
STAR, 2210.11352 (to appear in PRL)
PHENIX, Nature Phys. 15, 214 (2019)

"Di-hadron Correlation in STAR" --> "Differences in STAR-PHENIX Measurement"

"Mid-backward" ---> "Mid-forward" (I am not sure if this is a Phenix  
convention, I leave it to you)

put space between "2." and "Small" etc.

"Four kinds of..." --> "Four types of..."


"3.Nonflow effect is only estimated by one method" --> "Nonflow estimated  
using multiplicity scaling of p+p v_n"

"STAR: Two types of selections; |𝜂|<0.9 or -5.0<𝜂<-3.3"
--> "STAR: Two types of selections; activity in |𝜂|<0.9 or -5.0<𝜂<-3.3"

"PHENIX: Only using -3.9<𝜂<-3.1" --> "PHENIX: Using activity in  
-3.9<𝜂<-3.1"

I think the bullet on "longitudianal decorrelation" does not belong in the  
category of "Nonflow"
You can make another category:

Decorrelation:
STAR: Small longitudinal decorrelation is expected, boost invariant models  
can be directly compared
PHENIX: Large longitudinal decorrelation is expected
(here in words you can say 3+1D model should be used to understand  
STAR-PHENIX difference)

Slide#7:
On top left, cite the STAR paper and repeat for other slides (use bright bold 
 
fonts to highlight)
"STAR, 2210.11352 (to appear in PRL)"

When saying: "Four nonflow.... as reference"
  Can you add "Closure checked & verified" because it was challenged by 
PHENIX  
people

Slide#8:
Again, please add a citation of the STAR paper on the top (the current one is 
 
not visible)

"Non-flow subtracted v_2 and v_3 are method-independent"
-->
"Non-flow subtracted v_2 and v_3 show minimal method dependence"

Slide#9:
"Results are consistent between two kinds of different centrality definitions 
 
with mid and backward rapidity regions"
-->
"Results agree well for both centrality definitions using activity from mid  
and backward rapidity regions"

Slide#11:
"can reproduce both v_2 and v_3" --> "provide better description of v_2 and  
v_3"

Slide#12:
"canceled out" --> "cancel out"
"similar multiplicity events" --> "similar multiplicity events across  
systems"

"comparing similar multiplicity events" --> "comparing similar multiplicity  
events across systems"

slide#12-15:
I think we should write in the lower-left something like: "Midrapidity v_3  
implies no distinct triangular fluid shape in any system"























---
If you have any problems with the review process, please contact  
webmaster AT www.star.bnl.gov