STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

["Xing Wu" <wuxing6218 AT mails.ccnu.edu.cn>]

Dear Rich,

Thank you very much for your comments, I have already made modifications to my poster.

Please Kindly find the updated poster by the link: 

https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/QM2023_poster_xing_ver2.pdf

 

Thanks,

Xing Wu

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

From:  "Richard Seto"<seto AT ucr.edu>;

Date:  Tue, Aug 29, 2023 12:21 PM

To:  "star-fcv-l"<star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>; "吴星"<wuxing6218 AT mails.ccnu.edu.cn>;

Subject:  Re: Xing Wu - poster comments

 

Hi Xing

Poster comments
My main comment is that the plots are not easily visible especially the legends. Remember that these are posters and that people may not look at the plots closely if they cannot read them.

Abstract:
——————————
“Measurements of identified particle v1 and v2 is one”  —> “Measurements of identified particle v1 and v2 are some”

“studied” -> “shown.”

Dataset and Experimental setup.
——————————————————
Why are you showing the vertex cuts? I don’t think they are needed. Just say the energy and total number of events analyzed.

- Why do you say modest rates? At the fixed target energy, the detector does not limit the rates. The rate is limited by the amount of beam available and things like pile up. I would leave that out.


Analysis Procedures -> Analysis Procedure
————————————————————————
- In the event plane resolution plots  make the legend larger.
You can get rid of “by Xing” and “by Guoping” and just show one of the sets. At the moment the ones “by Xing” are not visible.  That will give you more room.
Also make a little figure to indicate EPD A, EPD B etc.

In addition the y axis needs to indicate resolution of R1 and R12.

On the invariant mass method plots make the legend bigger.  They are not visible.

v1/v2 Results
————
Make all legends bigger.

Make a comment about systematic errors. e.g. mention what effects contribute most to the systematic error.
e.g. “The region taken to integrate the yield in the invariant mass distribution is the primary contribution to the systematic error.”   Or whatever it is. You don’t have to mention everything you looked at. You just want to give the reader and idea of what effects are most important.

Also, instead of saying “two centrality bins”, why don’t you either specify them, or call them central and mid-central?  (Actually I think specifying 0-10% and 10-40% is better. )

Summary
—————

OK.

Best Regards
-Rich