STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

["Zuowen Liu" <liuzw AT mails.ccnu.edu.cn>]

Dear Subhash,

Thank you very much for your nice suggestions.

Kindly find the updated slides by the link: https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/presentations/Quark-Matter-2023/Anisotropic-Flow-Identified-Particles-Au-Au-Collisions-3-%E2%80%93-196-GeV

For EP slide: I have practiced the talk once, it would take 16 minutes or so.

Adding another slide may be out of time.

For slide #11: Here I just put the data legend and mode legend on the middle of two figure. Perhaps it would be less confusing...

Thanks again for your helpful suggestions.

Best regards,

Zuowen 

 

 

------------------ Original ------------------

From:  "subhash"<subhash AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>;

Date:  Mon, Aug 28, 2023 02:45 PM

To:  "star-fcv-l"<star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>;

Cc:  "Zuowen Liu"<liuzw AT mails.ccnu.edu.cn>;

Subject:  Re: [Star-fcv-l] STAR presentation by Zuowen Liu for Quark Matter 2023 got commented by Zhenyu Chen

 

Dear Zuowen,

Your slides are in a good shape. I have a few additional suggestions for
your consideration:

If time permits, you could one slide on estimation of event plane and
its resolution. In that slide you can also clarify the sign convension,
which is relevant v1 measurements

s#8,9: I would suggest to mention pt-acceptance & v1 fit function as
well.

s#9: I would suggest to move "at low pT" on the top of two bullets.

s#10: 2nd bullet, how about "Anti-flow could be explained by spectator
shadowing, without incorporating kaon potential" ?
The model legends on the two rows are confusing. Could you try changing
the styles for them, eg Cascade vs Cascade w/O spec?

s#11: Here also legends are confusing for me, eg Left figure: model
legends are missing, Right figure: models are only for Lambda. Could you
please try re-arranging legends and labels.

s#12: I would suggest removing 2nd bullet "Good NCQ scaling for strange
hadrons.", because you have a sub-sequent bullet with NCQ quantified

s#12 & 13: Please unify, either say partonic interaction play important
role or partonic interaction dominates. I would favor using the first
one.

Thanks and regards,
Subhash



On 2023-08-21 04:08 PM, Zuowen Liu via Star-fcv-l wrote:
> Dear Zhenyu
>
> Many thanks for your nice suggestions.
> I have implemented them into the slides.
>
> Kindly find the updated one by the link:
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/presentations/Quark-Matter-2023/Anisotropic-Flow-Identified-Particles-Au-Au-Collisions-3-%E2%80%93-196-GeV
>
> Thanks and Best regards,
> Zuowen
>
> ------------------ Original ------------------
>
> From:  "webmaster--- via Star-fcv-l"<star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>;
> Date:  Mon, Aug 21, 2023 01:48 PM
> To:  "star-fcv-l"<star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>;
> Cc:  "webmaster"<webmaster AT star.bnl.gov>;
> Subject:  [Star-fcv-l] STAR presentation by Zuowen Liu for Quark
> Matter 2023 got commented by Zhenyu Chen
>
> Dear star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
>
> Zhenyu Chen ( zhenyuchen AT sdu.edu.cn ) has commented on a material
> originally
> submitted by Zuowen Liu ( liuzw AT mails.ccnu.edu.cn ) at
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/presentations/Quark-Matter-2023/Anisotropic-Flow-Identified-Particles-Au-Au-Collisions-3-%E2%80%93-196-GeV
>
> Comment:
> Dear Zuowen,
>
> Nice slides. Please find few suggestions below:
> - General: Text font and color is not consistent for the reference on
>
> different slides
> - Slide3: boundary -> boundaries
> - Slide5: I would suggest to re-organize the text, v2 is also
> sensitive to
> fluctuation, v3 also provides insight on degree of freedom, you could
> make
> general statements instead of link vn with a single physics message
> one by
> one
> - Slide6: "with low pT cut" -> at low pT
> - Slide6: "3GeV: NCQ scaling violation vs. High energy: NCQ scaling"
> -> NCQ
> scaling violation at lower collision energy
> - Slide7: "Reproduced anti-flow of Ks0 at 3.9 GeV" -> Anti-flow
> observed for
> Ks0 at 3.9 GeV with pT < 0.7 GeV
> - Slide7: "within high pT window." -> with pT > 0.7 GeV
> - Slide8: Is the reference needed here?
> - Slide9&10: I would suggest to swap the order of the two slides,
> showing
> that adding the spectator effects would produce anti-flow
> - Slide12: "v1/v2" -> "v1, v2"
> - Slide12: "strength is weaker and weaker" is not scientific
> description
> - Slide12: "Better description....", it is very hard to see where this
>
> conclusion comes from with the current layout of the slide
> - Slide13: "v2/v3" -> "v2,v3"
> - Slide13: "qualified the NCQ scaling" -> enable the test of NCQ
> scaling
> - Slide13&14: "partonic interaction dominates", can we say
> "dominates"? maybe
> "play important roles"
> - Slide15: The summary now looks more like a theory talk. Please at
> least
> summarize what results have been presented, then follow by physics
> messages.
>
> Cheers,
> Zhenyu
>
> ---
> 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