STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

[Niseem Magdy <niseemmagdy AT yahoo.com>]

Dear Takafumi,

Thanks for your great help!

Please find the updated poster at the same link.

    - Can you
        define \rho_{n1,n2} and \rho_{n1,n2,n3}?
         >> It's hard to have a full formula; however, on the
        figure you can see what \rho_{n,m} related to.
    
        - “Except for rho_{2,6}…” Looks interesting. Do you have any
        naive explanation?
        >> It's related to how well the AMPT describes the initial
        state fluctuations. I plan to work more on these data model
        comparisons after the QM.

Thanks,
Niseem

On 8/25/23 8:15 AM, Takafumi Niida via Star-fcv-l wrote:

Dear Niseem,

I’m asked by STAR management to have a look at a few posters including yours. Please find my comments to your nice poster for your consideration.

Abstract:
- its weak -> their weak
- "constraints on the theoretical calculations' initial conditions and medium properties” I would remove “theoretical calculations’ “.

Motivation:
- Gives -> Give
-  the heavy ion collisions’ initial state -> the initial state in heavy-ion collisions

Analysis method
- “… four Event plane…” -> “… four event plane…”
- The table can be omitted and replaced with one sentence like “Two subevents for two, three, four particle cumulants and full-event for higher orders”. It would be more useful if you write definitions of SC(n,m) and NSC(n,m) explicitly here or “Flow harmonics correlations” section.
- “Summary of the methods used in these measurements” Not sure if this is needed.

Event plane angular correlations
- “Comparison of the three-, four-, five- and six-event plan”: The last part should be "six-order event plane”. 
As you also show psi1-psi2 correlation, probably better to say “Comparison of nth-order event plane angular correlations vs centrality”.
- Can you define \rho_{n1,n2} and \rho_{n1,n2,n3}?
- “The rho_{2,4} and rho_{2,3} show similar values…” rho_{2,3} is almost zero…
- “Except for rho_{2,6}…” Looks interesting. Do you have any naive explanation?
- “…less than the initial state’s” -> “…less than that from the initial state”
- For the legend of the left 6-panel plot, consider to add extra line (space) between “AMPT Au+Au 200 GeV” and “Au+Au 200 GeV” or perhaps to change “Au+Au 200 GeV” to “Data Au+Au 200 GeV”, so that it’s easier to see what are data and what is model.
- "expected to reduce the GMC effect” Do you mean “less affected by GMC”? Also spell out GMC when it appears for the first time.

Flow harmonics correlations
- "… six-particles...” -> “… six-particle…”
- “vs. Centrality” -> “vs. centrality”
- Can you say something about the energy dependence since you show many data in NSC?

Conclusion
- show -> shows (in two places)
- (Anti) -> (anti)

Best regards,
Takafumi
 


> On Aug 22, 2023, at 23:13, webmaster--- via Star-fcv-l <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>
> Dear star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
>
> Niseem Magdy Abdelwahab Abdelrahman (niseemmagdy AT yahoo.com) has submitted a  
> material for a review, please have a look:
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/64808
>
> Deadline: 2023-09-03
> ---
> 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