STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

[Sooraj Radhakrishnan <skradhakrishnan AT lbl.gov>]

Dear Chengdong, Xionghong, 

   These are very nice results and nicely prepared slides. On the outlook you mention that the high statistics 3 GeV dataset can constrain the coalescence parameters. But in the slides you dont show any attempt in that direction. If you reweight the input distributions to the coalescence afterburner to match the flow of protons and Lambda, would this help you constrain the parameters and test the coalescence picture? Was this tried?

Please find a few other comments on the slides below

S3: A caveat here is that for neutron stars what is relevant are the interactions at high densities, but through coalescence the extracted parameters are sensitive to the density at freeze-out 

S4: Title - Light and Hyper Nuclei in BES-II?

S5: Title - Collective Flow

S5: Left bullet 1) magnitude of v_n. v_n are sensitive quantities for studying EoS

S5: Left 2) can be removed

S5: Right side top: Collective flow

S5: Why restrict to only v_1 in the last two equations on the right?

S5: What are R, italic R and R_n in the first equation in the step? (N^R(phi - Psi_m) = ...). Also wjy Psi_m instead of Psi_n?

S6: Can you use a new version of the figure without HFT? Also, iTOF? 

S6: What do you mean uniform efficiency?

S7: Right plot, seems this comes a bit early as you show the reconstruction only in next slides

S9: 2) Collective flow (and everywhere); are calculated within the 

S11: The He4 slope deviates from the fit, this is likely because of the acceptance. Would it make sense to compare the values at fixed rapidity, say -0.6 to -0.4 for all light nuclei?

S11, S12: On S11 for light nuclei, both the data and model show good mass scaling (except for He4) separately. On S12, the proton v1 slope is very different between data and model, but for other light nuclei are comparable. Is this consistent?

S15: coalescence is the dominant formation mechanism at mid-rapidity

S15: 2) calculations for v1

Best,

Sooraj

On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 3:15 AM hexh--- via Star-fcv-l <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Dear All,

This is the slides from Chengdong. He has problem to login the blog webpage.
Thanks.

Best regards,
Xionghong

-----Original Message-----
From: star-fcv-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov <star-fcv-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov> On
Behalf Of webmaster--- via Star-fcv-l
Sent: Monday, August 21, 2023 5:51 PM
To: star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov
Cc: webmaster AT star.bnl.gov
Subject: [Star-fcv-l] STAR presentation by Xionghong He for Quark Matter
2023 submitted for review

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

Xionghong He (hexh AT impcas.ac.cn) has submitted a material for a review,
please have a look:
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/64787

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

--

Sooraj Radhakrishnan

Research Scientist,

Department of Physics

Kent State University

Kent, OH 44243

Physicist Postdoctoral Affiliate

Nuclear Science Division
Lawrence Berkeley National Lab
MS70R0319, One Cyclotron Road

Berkeley, CA 94720

Ph: 510-495-2473

Email: skradhakrishnan AT lbl.gov