star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov
Subject: STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG
List archive
Re: [Star-fcv-l] Star-fcv-l Digest, Vol 40, Issue 22
- From: gpwang <gpwang AT mails.ccnu.edu.cn>
- To: star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
- Subject: Re: [Star-fcv-l] Star-fcv-l Digest, Vol 40, Issue 22
- Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 12:36:22 +0800
Dear convener and all,
I have an update about v2 of strange hadrons in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV with official centrality.
Please add me to the agenda, I will upload the slides later.
Best regards,
Guoping
---- Replied Message ----
Send Star-fcv-l mailing list submissions to
star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fcv-l
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
star-fcv-l-request AT lists.bnl.gov
You can reach the person managing the list at
star-fcv-l-owner AT lists.bnl.gov
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Star-fcv-l digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. FCV PWG meeting on 13/December/2023 Wed. 9:30 AM EDT (subhash)
2. Re: FCV PWG meeting on 13/December/2023 Wed. 9:30 AM EDT
(=?gb18030?B?WGluZyBXdQ==?=)
3. Re: Discussion of systematic uncertainty calculation - FCV
PWG meeting on 06/December/2023 Wed. 9:30 AM EDT (Wang, Fuqiang)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 11:29:35 +0800
From: subhash <subhash AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>
To: "STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG"
<star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Subject: [Star-fcv-l] FCV PWG meeting on 13/December/2023 Wed. 9:30 AM
EDT
Message-ID: <c36479252d2a25d0e16772fbe5aeb120 AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Dear All,
We shall have our weekly FCV PWG meeting this Wednesday (13/Dec/2023) at
9:30 AM EDT. If you would like to present please let us know. Please try
posting your slides by Tuesday. The agenda will be collected at:
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/jjiastar/bulkcorr
Zoom details are copied below.
Thanks and regards,
Prithwish, Zhenyu and Subhash
ZOOM LINK FOR FCV MEETING:
Join ZoomGov Meeting
https://bnl.zoomgov.com/j/1612377416?pwd=V3kvcnN5ZTRLVEc4U01QWUUycDQ1UT09
Meeting ID: 161 237 7416
Passcode: 106847
One tap mobile
+16692545252,,1612377416#,,,,*106847# US (San Jose)
+16468287666,,1612377416#,,,,*106847# US (New York)
Dial by your location
+1 669 254 5252 US (San Jose)
+1 646 828 7666 US (New York)
+1 551 285 1373 US
+1 669 216 1590 US (San Jose)
Meeting ID: 161 237 7416
Passcode: 106847
Find your local number: https://bnl.zoomgov.com/u/abVqdu5fbU
Join by SIP
1612377416 AT sip.zoomgov.com
Join by H.323
161.199.138.10 (US West)
161.199.136.10 (US East)
Meeting ID: 161 237 7416
Passcode: 106847
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 11:37:23 +0800
From: "=?gb18030?B?WGluZyBXdQ==?=" <wuxing6218 AT mails.ccnu.edu.cn>
To:
"=?gb18030?B?U1RBUiBGbG93LCBDaGlyYWxpdHkgYW5kIFZvcnRpY2l0eSBQV0c=?="
<star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Subject: Re: [Star-fcv-l] FCV PWG meeting on 13/December/2023 Wed.
9:30 AM EDT
Message-ID: <tencent_4D2923B50DFBA52C3A583B52 AT qq.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb18030"
Dear convener and all,
I would like to present pions? kaons and protons v2 analysis in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV.
Please add me to the agenda, and the slides will be posted later.
Thanks and best regards,
Xing Wu
----------Reply to Message----------
On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 11:29 AM subhash via Star-fcv-l<star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
Dear All,
We shall have our weekly FCV PWG meeting this Wednesday (13/Dec/2023) at
9:30 AM EDT. If you would like to present please let us know. Please try
posting your slides by Tuesday. The agenda will be collected at:
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/jjiastar/bulkcorr
Zoom details are copied below.
Thanks and regards,
Prithwish, Zhenyu and Subhash
ZOOM LINK FOR FCV MEETING:
Join ZoomGov Meeting
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://bnl.zoomgov.com/j/1612377416?pwd=V3kvcnN5ZTRLVEc4U01QWUUycDQ1UT09__;!!P4SdNyxKAPE!HjwGaMzvjE548h_rn-OIPkujmqfssmF-n5VA3f5yVY3JNJ388dmrizefguiiKa-aY6wNe90rp1ltuLxDz8k0ZfYmAwkrRIY6p0wg$
Meeting ID: 161 237 7416
Passcode: 106847
One tap mobile
+16692545252,,1612377416#,,,,*106847# US (San Jose)
+16468287666,,1612377416#,,,,*106847# US (New York)
Dial by your location
+1 669 254 5252 US (San Jose)
+1 646 828 7666 US (New York)
+1 551 285 1373 US
+1 669 216 1590 US (San Jose)
Meeting ID: 161 237 7416
Passcode: 106847
Find your local number: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://bnl.zoomgov.com/u/abVqdu5fbU__;!!P4SdNyxKAPE!HjwGaMzvjE548h_rn-OIPkujmqfssmF-n5VA3f5yVY3JNJ388dmrizefguiiKa-aY6wNe90rp1ltuLxDz8k0ZfYmAwkrRIiHfS9r$
Join by SIP
1612377416 AT sip.zoomgov.com
Join by H.323
161.199.138.10 (US West)
161.199.136.10 (US East)
Meeting ID: 161 237 7416
Passcode: 106847
_______________________________________________
Star-fcv-l mailing list
Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fcv-l
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.bnl.gov/pipermail/star-fcv-l/attachments/20231211/ec8bdb0d/attachment-0001.htm%3E
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 04:16:26 +0000
From: "Wang, Fuqiang" <fqwang AT purdue.edu>
To: "Tang, Aihong" <aihong AT bnl.gov>
Cc: "STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG"
<star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>, Huan Zhong Huang <huang AT physics.ucla.edu>
Subject: Re: [Star-fcv-l] Discussion of systematic uncertainty
calculation - FCV PWG meeting on 06/December/2023 Wed. 9:30 AM EDT
Message-ID: <E9794CFD-46A1-4007-88A4-1C8D383735E2 AT purdue.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hi Aihong,
It boils down to the question whether dca<1 and dca<2 cm (as an example here) are really the two limits. There?s no magic here.
In the 20+ years of STAR publication, it has been in most cases taken as a reasonable 1 sigma estimate of syst uncertainty. If you want to treat it as the min. - max. range in a particular result so you divide it by sqrt(12), you really have to demonstrate it to a reasonably believable degree.
Best regards,
Fuqiang
On Dec 11, 2023, at 10:01?AM, Tang, Aihong <aihong AT bnl.gov> wrote:
?
---- External Email: Use caution with attachments, links, or sharing data ----
Hi, all :
I wanted to share my perspective on the issue of handling systematic errors to ensure clarity and understanding.
To start, let me walk through the way we usually derive our systematic errors. For an individual systematic source, we operate under the assumption that the underlying distribution is uniform - a reasonable assumption in our context. The RMS of a uniform distribution is well-defined, it is span/sqrt(12). Extending this to multiple independent systematic sources, the final measurement is expected to follow a Gaussian distribution, leading to the total systematic error being the quadrature sum of individual systematic errors.
Let's take the DCA cut as an example of individual systematic error. Say, the default cut is 2cm, with a 1cm variation. We treat measurements within the range [1,2] cm as equally valid, regardless of the specific cut value. Without more information, this is the most unbiased treatment. Consequently, these measurements are assigned the same systematic uncertainty, reflecting the inability of our experimental setup to differentiate their importance or discern their systematic uncertainties.
It's essential to recognize that the range of the uniform distribution is an estimation derived from the two boundaries measured with DCA < 2cm and DCA < 1cm, respectively. While usually referred to as maximum and minimum, they are not necessarily the true caps of the actual values but serve as practical estimates. If our statistics allows, we may scan around the [1,2] cm region for verification, but this is typically unpractical when statistical error dominates.
In some instances, the central (mean) value of the uniform distribution may not align with the default value, which could be on one edge. Despite this, all measurements share the same systematic uncertainty, making it applicable to the default value. We opt for the default of DCA < 2cm due to its minimal statistical error while maintaining validity comparable to the central value or any other value within the uniform distribution. When we have multiple systematic sources, their central values fall on both sides of the default, making the final central value closer to the default.
I have heard the suggestion of adopting a one-way systematic error when the default is at the edge, and I am not sure if it is a good idea. The default value being at the edge doesn't definitely imply that a more appropriate value couldn't exist beyond that edge. In reality, the optimal value might fall outside that range, and assigning a one-way error could incorrectly imply the knowledge on the certainty about the optimal value.
At this level, we are constrained by the ultimate limitation of our experimental device, and we find ourselves relying heavily on assumptions, acknowledging that no procedure is perfect. However, in my perspective, the rationale behind span/sqrt(12) is clear and justifiable. I see no compelling reason to open another extensive discussion on how STAR handles systematic error, in particular in light of the difficult debate we experienced during the writing of the isobar blind analysis paper.
Thanks,
Aihong
On Dec 8, 2023, at 12:03 AM, Huan Zhong Huang via Star-fcv-l <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>> wrote:
Hi Diyu, All,
I had a discussion with Zhiwan and I understand that this issue was hotly debated during her paper proposal presentation to the PWG as well. The systematic error estimate is clearly an experimental art, and all the approaches/proposals under discussion are with some merits and disadvantages when viewed from certain perspectives. Zhiwan and I are convinced that the approach in the published isobar CME paper is a well balanced approach approved by the collaboration and we intend to follow in our paper.
If people really think that the previous STAR approach in the isobar CME is wrong and intend to push for an erratum to be published by the STAR collaboration to correct the "mistake" soon, we will be happy to take the new approved STAR approach for systematic error estimate. Until then, please do not waste your time and everyone else time to go back and forth on this issue. I have seen enough email exchanges on this topic. If it is not going to converge under normal discussion, then let the STAR publication procedure to take its course.
I did not mean to start new discussion and do not expect me to respond to emails on this topic. Thanks. Regards,
Huan
-----Original Message-----
From: Star-fcv-l <star-fcv-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:star-fcv-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov>> On Behalf Of dshen via Star-fcv-l
Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 6:51 PM
To: Wang, Fuqiang <fqwang AT purdue.edu<mailto:fqwang AT purdue.edu>>
Cc: dshen <dshen AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov<mailto:dshen AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>>; STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>>
Subject: Re: [Star-fcv-l] Discussion of systematic uncertainty calculation - FCV PWG meeting on 06/December/2023 Wed. 9:30 AM EDT
Hi Fuqiang,
I disagree with this statement:
"For example, just for the sake of illustration, it is possible that
DCA<1.5 cm gives the min. result and DCA<0.8 cm gives the max result, however, one would have to scan the DCA space to know this."
We don't have to scan the DCA to find the min and mix number, we just need to find a reasonable range that we are confident to cover the non-biased value. Certainly you will have a large variation if you use
DCA<0.01 - there are only few tracks, but we don't use it based on common sense.
Best,
Diyu
On 2023-12-08 10:30, Wang, Fuqiang wrote:
Hi Diyu,
Please see comments in color below.
Best regards,
Fuqiang
-------------------------
From: dshen <dshen AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov<mailto:dshen AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>>
Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 7:07 PM
To: STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>>
Cc: Wang, Fuqiang <fqwang AT purdue.edu<mailto:fqwang AT purdue.edu>>
Subject: Re: [Star-fcv-l] Discussion of systematic uncertainty
calculation - FCV PWG meeting on 06/December/2023 Wed. 9:30 AM EDT
[You don't often get email from dshen AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov<mailto:dshen AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>. Learn why this
is important at https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification__;!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz96OoHNnyQ$ [1] ]
---- External Email: Use caution with attachments, links, or sharing
data ----
Hi Fuqiang,
It seems we have an agreement on the first point, i.e. the result to
lie
between def - diff and def + diff. It doesn't say the diff should be
the
maximum, say, it has to be default to DCA<0.01 or <100.
Just to make sure we're on the same page: If we say the results lie
between def - diff and def + diff, we mean these are min and max. We
do have to make reasonably sure these are the min-max range. They of
course do not have to come from the min-max range of the cut, as the
result may not linearly depend on the cut. For example, just for the
sake of illustration, it is possible that DCA<1.5 cm gives the min.
result and DCA<0.8 cm gives the max result, however, one would have to
scan the DCA space to know this.
Regarding 1 sigma should be diff/sqrt(12) or 2*diff/sqrt(12), let me
explain it in terms of probability.
Let's take an example, say, the measured quantity is 0, and the
variation is 1. Then we assume the non-biased value is in between -1
to
1 with a uniform distribution. So I present the result as 0 +-
1/sqrt(12), it means the non-biased value falls within +- 1/sqrt(12)
with a probability of 2*1/sqrt(12) which is exactly the standard
deviation of 2*varition=2. If you define 1 sigma as
2*variation/sqrt(12), then we should present as +- half sigma to have
the same probability as before.
For a flat distribution of width 2, the equivalent Gaussian sigma is
2/sqrt(12). So the error is +/- 2/sqrt(12). It is +/- 1/sqrt(3) or
approximately +/- 0.6, or 1.2 out of 2, i.e. 60%.
Thanks,
Diyu
On 2023-12-08 02:17, Wang, Fuqiang via Star-fcv-l wrote:
Hi Diyu,
So the central issue is whether you get the maximum variation. If
one
varies towards only one side, and quote +/- assuming the variation
is
symmetric, then you?re really assuming the result to lie between
min
def-diff and max diff+diff, so you should quote def +/-
diff/sqrt(3).
Best regards,
Fuqiang
On Dec 7, 2023, at 1:08?PM, Wang, Fuqiang <fqwang AT purdue.edu<mailto:fqwang AT purdue.edu>>
wrote:
?---- External Email: Use caution with attachments, links, or
sharing
data ----
Hi Diyu,
I realize that there may be a misunderstanding on the term ?max.
variation?. It means variations in cuts that result in maximum
variation in result.
Regarding sqrt(12) vs sqrt(3):
If one believes def. is min and sys. is max, then it?s probably
better
to quote the average of def. and sys. as the central value and +/-
diff/sqrt(12) as the error.
If there?s strong reason to quote the value to be the min. (or
max.
for that matter) and the negative side error is really zero, then
we
should quote the value as def.+diff/sqrt(3) not sqrt(12) because
the
common understanding of error is that it covers 68% probability.
Best regards,
Fuqiang
On Dec 7, 2023, at 10:50?AM, dshen <dshen AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov<mailto:dshen AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>>
wrote:
?[You don't often get email from dshen AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov<mailto:dshen AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>. Learn
why
this is important at
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2F*2Faka.ms*2FLearnAboutSenderIdentification__*3B!!P4SdNyxKAPE!HrVa2wHd3fzH5a6Dr0kh6WgIrrU2y5XXz4t2XzuC3J9-Pwp1Dh9szY1HZyJ18mNbUqk5PWsV8mJ1HGVk7kTAs3ZK0w*24&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=BudDVYUCNGX5mhUtidYB5bk1KS3t6q2pK3vMrMqdkak*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz94OX8Ck7w$
]
---- External Email: Use caution with attachments, links, or
sharing
data ----
Hi Fuqiang,
One sigma is |def.-sys.|/sqrt(12), and it shows as +- 1 sigma for
the
case of (def. - |def.-sys.|, def. + |def.-sys.|).
The critical point is that it doesn't require a maximum variation,
it
just requires that the variation could cover the true value. The
confidence level is based on experience and common sense, there is
no
mathematical way to quantify it - it is not statistics.
Best,
Diyu
On 2023-12-07 23:28, Wang, Fuqiang wrote:
Hi Diyu,
What you wrote is just another way to say that the physics
quantity
in
question is within the min and max of (def. - |def.-sys.|, def.
+
|def.-sys.|), respectively. In such a case, one would quote a
sigma
of
2*|def.-sys.|/sqrt(12) = |def.-sys.|/sqrt(3). The essential point
is
to demonstrate to reasonable confidence that this is indeed the
maximum syst. variation in the result.
Best regards,
Fuqiang
On Dec 7, 2023, at 6:32?AM, dshen via Star-fcv-l
<star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>> wrote:
?---- External Email: Use caution with attachments, links, or
sharing
data ----
Hi Fuqiang, Zhiwan and all,
It was a inspiring discussion on the systematic uncertainty
calculations
yesterday, it pushes me to think.
I tend to agree with Zhiwan and what the blind-analysis did,
i.e.
use
denominator of 1/sqrt(12).
The argument was that one shouldn't divide the variation by
1/sqrt(12)
because the variation isn't proved to be the maximum - minimum,
I
think
there is a misunderstanding of the reason behind it.
It isn't based on the assumption that the variation is maximum -
minimum, the underlying assumption is that the true value falls
within
"default cut" +- "variation".
Let's take an example, say, the default cut is DCA<2, and the
systematic
cut is DCA<1.
The assumption is that the non-biased value is in the interval
of
(def.
- |def.-sys.|, def. + |def.-sys.|), and it can be any value in
that
interval with equal probability (uniform distribution) assuming
we
don't
have any pre-knowledge to the best position. That's the reason
of
why
people assign |def.-sys.|/sqrt(12) as 1 sigma and use two-side
band.
It hasn't to be the maximum - minimum, although it isn't
incorrect
technically to use larger uncertainty, say, use Dca<0.1 to
Dca<100.
But
I think the principal is to provide the best estimate instead of
the
most conservative value.
What variation can be considered as reasonable? I think it is
based
on
experience and common sense to a specific physics topic. For CME
study,
like what Zhiwan did, it is reasonable to assume the non-biased
value
falls with in DCA<2 +- |DCA<2 - DCA<1|, for example.
That's my two cents.
Best,
Diyu
On 2023-12-06 05:10, Zhiwan Xu via Star-fcv-l wrote:
Dear Conveners,
I would like to update the paper proposal on the CME search in
STAR
BES-II.
Please kindly add me to the schedule.
The paper proposal webpage:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Fdrupal.star.bnl.gov*2FSTAR*2Fblog*2Fzhiwanxu*2FPaper-Proposal-Search-Chiral-Magnetic-Effect-RHIC-Beam-Energy-Scan-II&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=XPxElSkqRxWGoWxH*2BbQZ2*2FGlr0MXUUw3G1fUItAsYL0*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJQ!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz94kDExI4w$
The slides:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Fdrupal.star.bnl.gov*2FSTAR*2Fsystem*2Ffiles*2Fpaper_proposal_CME_BESII_v2.pdf&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=2y1vzawzEBBmUmaFllAHSsAPx*2BiL38AXrzvRHIuSuuM*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz94i7R49rg$
Best,
Zhiwan
------------------------------------
Zhiwan Xu,
Department of Physics and Astronomy, UCLA
zhiwanxu AT physics.ucla.edu<mailto:zhiwanxu AT physics.ucla.edu>
----- Original Message -----
From: "subhash via Star-fcv-l" <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>>
To: "STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG"
<star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>>
Cc: "subhash" <subhash AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov<mailto:subhash AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>>
Sent: Sunday, December 3, 2023 11:21:34 PM
Subject: [Star-fcv-l] FCV PWG meeting on 06/December/2023 Wed.
9:30
AM
EDT
Dear All,
We shall have our weekly FCV PWG meeting this Wednesday
(06/Dec/2023)
at
9:30 AM EDT. If you would like to present please let us know.
Please
try
posting your slides by Tuesday. The agenda will be collected
at:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Fdrupal.star.bnl.gov*2FSTAR*2Fblog*2Fjjiastar*2Fbulkcorr&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=bAiiaqpKBnYB0QTGpieQn1nDsJhS1Yg9iUgYrkH3xuI*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz959K8iK9A$
Zoom details are copied below.
Thanks and regards,
Prithwish, Zhenyu and Subhash
ZOOM LINK FOR FCV MEETING:
Join ZoomGov Meeting
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2F*2Fbnl.zoomgov.com*2Fj*2F1612377416*3Fpwd*3DV3kvcnN5ZTRLVEc4U01QWUUycDQ1UT09__*3B!!P4SdNyxKAPE!Av9BM9pZUBzjZ_00gC1v6T-rpsdGpwGXddNo2NvBobwjtpFEHdX8vla8TPZfmG4ld-LS-FpqRe7vqLmI9mb3UG7nFqyunx-QfA*24&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=NqoVbniQ1EacmFFwOmEQAXGcxGZuEpcPZxJVz4jZ6YM*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz94kdUEnqg$
Meeting ID: 161 237 7416
Passcode: 106847
One tap mobile
+16692545252,,1612377416#,,,,*106847# US (San Jose)
+16468287666,,1612377416#,,,,*106847# US (New York)
Dial by your location
+1 669 254 5252 US (San Jose)
+1 646 828 7666 US (New York)
+1 551 285 1373 US
+1 669 216 1590 US (San Jose)
Meeting ID: 161 237 7416
Passcode: 106847
Find your local number:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2F*2Fbnl.zoomgov.com*2Fu*2FabVqdu5fbU__*3B!!P4SdNyxKAPE!Av9BM9pZUBzjZ_00gC1v6T-rpsdGpwGXddNo2NvBobwjtpFEHdX8vla8TPZfmG4ld-LS-FpqRe7vqLmI9mb3UG7nFqxQ4jG3og*24&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=8MRf00a7PkGJ5HcODQ5eoXYTc*2BgvRP*2Fw*2FlYek4TEPEw*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJQ!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz966j-u1uA$
Join by SIP
1612377416 AT sip.zoomgov.com<mailto:1612377416 AT sip.zoomgov.com>
Join by H.323
161.199.138.10 (US West)
161.199.136.10 (US East)
Meeting ID: 161 237 7416
Passcode: 106847
_______________________________________________
Star-fcv-l mailing list
Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Flists.bnl.gov*2Fmailman*2Flistinfo*2Fstar-fcv-l&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=lPev6xz1K58v73G*2FNKWvq4crD1TXbB1ouv4Cvnu1owk*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz95zIqIBuQ$
_______________________________________________
Star-fcv-l mailing list
Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Flists.bnl.gov*2Fmailman*2Flistinfo*2Fstar-fcv-l&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=lPev6xz1K58v73G*2FNKWvq4crD1TXbB1ouv4Cvnu1owk*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz95zIqIBuQ$
_______________________________________________
Star-fcv-l mailing list
Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Flists.bnl.gov*2Fmailman*2Flistinfo*2Fstar-fcv-l&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=lPev6xz1K58v73G*2FNKWvq4crD1TXbB1ouv4Cvnu1owk*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz95zIqIBuQ$
_______________________________________________
Star-fcv-l mailing list
Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Flists.bnl.gov*2Fmailman*2Flistinfo*2Fstar-fcv-l&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=lPev6xz1K58v73G*2FNKWvq4crD1TXbB1ouv4Cvnu1owk*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz95zIqIBuQ$
_______________________________________________
Star-fcv-l mailing list
Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Flists.bnl.gov*2Fmailman*2Flistinfo*2Fstar-fcv-l&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=lPev6xz1K58v73G*2FNKWvq4crD1TXbB1ouv4Cvnu1owk*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz95zIqIBuQ$
Links:
------
[1]
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification__;!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EjpBbeU0hZJonbaEgO1BIObB5ChakAucmBia_AjoDrMf0hNjZDd4P5OIhSJhG7y7GBJB_Ydydq8Rx5YipZVhK98$
[2]
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification__;!!P4SdNyxKAPE!HrVa2wHd3fzH5a6Dr0kh6WgIrrU2y5XXz4t2XzuC3J9-Pwp1Dh9szY1HZyJ18mNbUqk5PWsV8mJ1HGVk7kTAs3ZK0w$
[3]
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/zhiwanxu/Paper-Proposal-Search-Chiral-Magnetic-Effect-RHIC-Beam-Energy-Scan-II
[4]
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/paper_proposal_CME_BESII_v2.pdf
[5] https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/jjiastar/bulkcorr
[6]
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://bnl.zoomgov.com/j/1612377416?pwd=V3kvcnN5ZTRLVEc4U01QWUUycDQ1UT09__;!!P4SdNyxKAPE!Av9BM9pZUBzjZ_00gC1v6T-rpsdGpwGXddNo2NvBobwjtpFEHdX8vla8TPZfmG4ld-LS-FpqRe7vqLmI9mb3UG7nFqyunx-QfA$
[7]
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://bnl.zoomgov.com/u/abVqdu5fbU__;!!P4SdNyxKAPE!Av9BM9pZUBzjZ_00gC1v6T-rpsdGpwGXddNo2NvBobwjtpFEHdX8vla8TPZfmG4ld-LS-FpqRe7vqLmI9mb3UG7nFqxQ4jG3og$
[8] https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fcv-l
_______________________________________________
Star-fcv-l mailing list
Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto: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<mailto:Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fcv-l
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.bnl.gov/pipermail/star-fcv-l/attachments/20231211/8adaa39a/attachment.htm%3E
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Star-fcv-l mailing list
Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fcv-l
------------------------------
End of Star-fcv-l Digest, Vol 40, Issue 22
******************************************
star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fcv-l
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
star-fcv-l-request AT lists.bnl.gov
You can reach the person managing the list at
star-fcv-l-owner AT lists.bnl.gov
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Star-fcv-l digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. FCV PWG meeting on 13/December/2023 Wed. 9:30 AM EDT (subhash)
2. Re: FCV PWG meeting on 13/December/2023 Wed. 9:30 AM EDT
(=?gb18030?B?WGluZyBXdQ==?=)
3. Re: Discussion of systematic uncertainty calculation - FCV
PWG meeting on 06/December/2023 Wed. 9:30 AM EDT (Wang, Fuqiang)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 11:29:35 +0800
From: subhash <subhash AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>
To: "STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG"
<star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Subject: [Star-fcv-l] FCV PWG meeting on 13/December/2023 Wed. 9:30 AM
EDT
Message-ID: <c36479252d2a25d0e16772fbe5aeb120 AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Dear All,
We shall have our weekly FCV PWG meeting this Wednesday (13/Dec/2023) at
9:30 AM EDT. If you would like to present please let us know. Please try
posting your slides by Tuesday. The agenda will be collected at:
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/jjiastar/bulkcorr
Zoom details are copied below.
Thanks and regards,
Prithwish, Zhenyu and Subhash
ZOOM LINK FOR FCV MEETING:
Join ZoomGov Meeting
https://bnl.zoomgov.com/j/1612377416?pwd=V3kvcnN5ZTRLVEc4U01QWUUycDQ1UT09
Meeting ID: 161 237 7416
Passcode: 106847
One tap mobile
+16692545252,,1612377416#,,,,*106847# US (San Jose)
+16468287666,,1612377416#,,,,*106847# US (New York)
Dial by your location
+1 669 254 5252 US (San Jose)
+1 646 828 7666 US (New York)
+1 551 285 1373 US
+1 669 216 1590 US (San Jose)
Meeting ID: 161 237 7416
Passcode: 106847
Find your local number: https://bnl.zoomgov.com/u/abVqdu5fbU
Join by SIP
1612377416 AT sip.zoomgov.com
Join by H.323
161.199.138.10 (US West)
161.199.136.10 (US East)
Meeting ID: 161 237 7416
Passcode: 106847
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 11:37:23 +0800
From: "=?gb18030?B?WGluZyBXdQ==?=" <wuxing6218 AT mails.ccnu.edu.cn>
To:
"=?gb18030?B?U1RBUiBGbG93LCBDaGlyYWxpdHkgYW5kIFZvcnRpY2l0eSBQV0c=?="
<star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Subject: Re: [Star-fcv-l] FCV PWG meeting on 13/December/2023 Wed.
9:30 AM EDT
Message-ID: <tencent_4D2923B50DFBA52C3A583B52 AT qq.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb18030"
Dear convener and all,
I would like to present pions? kaons and protons v2 analysis in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV.
Please add me to the agenda, and the slides will be posted later.
Thanks and best regards,
Xing Wu
----------Reply to Message----------
On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 11:29 AM subhash via Star-fcv-l<star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
Dear All,
We shall have our weekly FCV PWG meeting this Wednesday (13/Dec/2023) at
9:30 AM EDT. If you would like to present please let us know. Please try
posting your slides by Tuesday. The agenda will be collected at:
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/jjiastar/bulkcorr
Zoom details are copied below.
Thanks and regards,
Prithwish, Zhenyu and Subhash
ZOOM LINK FOR FCV MEETING:
Join ZoomGov Meeting
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://bnl.zoomgov.com/j/1612377416?pwd=V3kvcnN5ZTRLVEc4U01QWUUycDQ1UT09__;!!P4SdNyxKAPE!HjwGaMzvjE548h_rn-OIPkujmqfssmF-n5VA3f5yVY3JNJ388dmrizefguiiKa-aY6wNe90rp1ltuLxDz8k0ZfYmAwkrRIY6p0wg$
Meeting ID: 161 237 7416
Passcode: 106847
One tap mobile
+16692545252,,1612377416#,,,,*106847# US (San Jose)
+16468287666,,1612377416#,,,,*106847# US (New York)
Dial by your location
+1 669 254 5252 US (San Jose)
+1 646 828 7666 US (New York)
+1 551 285 1373 US
+1 669 216 1590 US (San Jose)
Meeting ID: 161 237 7416
Passcode: 106847
Find your local number: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://bnl.zoomgov.com/u/abVqdu5fbU__;!!P4SdNyxKAPE!HjwGaMzvjE548h_rn-OIPkujmqfssmF-n5VA3f5yVY3JNJ388dmrizefguiiKa-aY6wNe90rp1ltuLxDz8k0ZfYmAwkrRIiHfS9r$
Join by SIP
1612377416 AT sip.zoomgov.com
Join by H.323
161.199.138.10 (US West)
161.199.136.10 (US East)
Meeting ID: 161 237 7416
Passcode: 106847
_______________________________________________
Star-fcv-l mailing list
Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fcv-l
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.bnl.gov/pipermail/star-fcv-l/attachments/20231211/ec8bdb0d/attachment-0001.htm%3E
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 04:16:26 +0000
From: "Wang, Fuqiang" <fqwang AT purdue.edu>
To: "Tang, Aihong" <aihong AT bnl.gov>
Cc: "STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG"
<star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>, Huan Zhong Huang <huang AT physics.ucla.edu>
Subject: Re: [Star-fcv-l] Discussion of systematic uncertainty
calculation - FCV PWG meeting on 06/December/2023 Wed. 9:30 AM EDT
Message-ID: <E9794CFD-46A1-4007-88A4-1C8D383735E2 AT purdue.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hi Aihong,
It boils down to the question whether dca<1 and dca<2 cm (as an example here) are really the two limits. There?s no magic here.
In the 20+ years of STAR publication, it has been in most cases taken as a reasonable 1 sigma estimate of syst uncertainty. If you want to treat it as the min. - max. range in a particular result so you divide it by sqrt(12), you really have to demonstrate it to a reasonably believable degree.
Best regards,
Fuqiang
On Dec 11, 2023, at 10:01?AM, Tang, Aihong <aihong AT bnl.gov> wrote:
?
---- External Email: Use caution with attachments, links, or sharing data ----
Hi, all :
I wanted to share my perspective on the issue of handling systematic errors to ensure clarity and understanding.
To start, let me walk through the way we usually derive our systematic errors. For an individual systematic source, we operate under the assumption that the underlying distribution is uniform - a reasonable assumption in our context. The RMS of a uniform distribution is well-defined, it is span/sqrt(12). Extending this to multiple independent systematic sources, the final measurement is expected to follow a Gaussian distribution, leading to the total systematic error being the quadrature sum of individual systematic errors.
Let's take the DCA cut as an example of individual systematic error. Say, the default cut is 2cm, with a 1cm variation. We treat measurements within the range [1,2] cm as equally valid, regardless of the specific cut value. Without more information, this is the most unbiased treatment. Consequently, these measurements are assigned the same systematic uncertainty, reflecting the inability of our experimental setup to differentiate their importance or discern their systematic uncertainties.
It's essential to recognize that the range of the uniform distribution is an estimation derived from the two boundaries measured with DCA < 2cm and DCA < 1cm, respectively. While usually referred to as maximum and minimum, they are not necessarily the true caps of the actual values but serve as practical estimates. If our statistics allows, we may scan around the [1,2] cm region for verification, but this is typically unpractical when statistical error dominates.
In some instances, the central (mean) value of the uniform distribution may not align with the default value, which could be on one edge. Despite this, all measurements share the same systematic uncertainty, making it applicable to the default value. We opt for the default of DCA < 2cm due to its minimal statistical error while maintaining validity comparable to the central value or any other value within the uniform distribution. When we have multiple systematic sources, their central values fall on both sides of the default, making the final central value closer to the default.
I have heard the suggestion of adopting a one-way systematic error when the default is at the edge, and I am not sure if it is a good idea. The default value being at the edge doesn't definitely imply that a more appropriate value couldn't exist beyond that edge. In reality, the optimal value might fall outside that range, and assigning a one-way error could incorrectly imply the knowledge on the certainty about the optimal value.
At this level, we are constrained by the ultimate limitation of our experimental device, and we find ourselves relying heavily on assumptions, acknowledging that no procedure is perfect. However, in my perspective, the rationale behind span/sqrt(12) is clear and justifiable. I see no compelling reason to open another extensive discussion on how STAR handles systematic error, in particular in light of the difficult debate we experienced during the writing of the isobar blind analysis paper.
Thanks,
Aihong
On Dec 8, 2023, at 12:03 AM, Huan Zhong Huang via Star-fcv-l <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>> wrote:
Hi Diyu, All,
I had a discussion with Zhiwan and I understand that this issue was hotly debated during her paper proposal presentation to the PWG as well. The systematic error estimate is clearly an experimental art, and all the approaches/proposals under discussion are with some merits and disadvantages when viewed from certain perspectives. Zhiwan and I are convinced that the approach in the published isobar CME paper is a well balanced approach approved by the collaboration and we intend to follow in our paper.
If people really think that the previous STAR approach in the isobar CME is wrong and intend to push for an erratum to be published by the STAR collaboration to correct the "mistake" soon, we will be happy to take the new approved STAR approach for systematic error estimate. Until then, please do not waste your time and everyone else time to go back and forth on this issue. I have seen enough email exchanges on this topic. If it is not going to converge under normal discussion, then let the STAR publication procedure to take its course.
I did not mean to start new discussion and do not expect me to respond to emails on this topic. Thanks. Regards,
Huan
-----Original Message-----
From: Star-fcv-l <star-fcv-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:star-fcv-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov>> On Behalf Of dshen via Star-fcv-l
Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 6:51 PM
To: Wang, Fuqiang <fqwang AT purdue.edu<mailto:fqwang AT purdue.edu>>
Cc: dshen <dshen AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov<mailto:dshen AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>>; STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>>
Subject: Re: [Star-fcv-l] Discussion of systematic uncertainty calculation - FCV PWG meeting on 06/December/2023 Wed. 9:30 AM EDT
Hi Fuqiang,
I disagree with this statement:
"For example, just for the sake of illustration, it is possible that
DCA<1.5 cm gives the min. result and DCA<0.8 cm gives the max result, however, one would have to scan the DCA space to know this."
We don't have to scan the DCA to find the min and mix number, we just need to find a reasonable range that we are confident to cover the non-biased value. Certainly you will have a large variation if you use
DCA<0.01 - there are only few tracks, but we don't use it based on common sense.
Best,
Diyu
On 2023-12-08 10:30, Wang, Fuqiang wrote:
Hi Diyu,
Please see comments in color below.
Best regards,
Fuqiang
-------------------------
From: dshen <dshen AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov<mailto:dshen AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>>
Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 7:07 PM
To: STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>>
Cc: Wang, Fuqiang <fqwang AT purdue.edu<mailto:fqwang AT purdue.edu>>
Subject: Re: [Star-fcv-l] Discussion of systematic uncertainty
calculation - FCV PWG meeting on 06/December/2023 Wed. 9:30 AM EDT
[You don't often get email from dshen AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov<mailto:dshen AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>. Learn why this
is important at https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification__;!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz96OoHNnyQ$ [1] ]
---- External Email: Use caution with attachments, links, or sharing
data ----
Hi Fuqiang,
It seems we have an agreement on the first point, i.e. the result to
lie
between def - diff and def + diff. It doesn't say the diff should be
the
maximum, say, it has to be default to DCA<0.01 or <100.
Just to make sure we're on the same page: If we say the results lie
between def - diff and def + diff, we mean these are min and max. We
do have to make reasonably sure these are the min-max range. They of
course do not have to come from the min-max range of the cut, as the
result may not linearly depend on the cut. For example, just for the
sake of illustration, it is possible that DCA<1.5 cm gives the min.
result and DCA<0.8 cm gives the max result, however, one would have to
scan the DCA space to know this.
Regarding 1 sigma should be diff/sqrt(12) or 2*diff/sqrt(12), let me
explain it in terms of probability.
Let's take an example, say, the measured quantity is 0, and the
variation is 1. Then we assume the non-biased value is in between -1
to
1 with a uniform distribution. So I present the result as 0 +-
1/sqrt(12), it means the non-biased value falls within +- 1/sqrt(12)
with a probability of 2*1/sqrt(12) which is exactly the standard
deviation of 2*varition=2. If you define 1 sigma as
2*variation/sqrt(12), then we should present as +- half sigma to have
the same probability as before.
For a flat distribution of width 2, the equivalent Gaussian sigma is
2/sqrt(12). So the error is +/- 2/sqrt(12). It is +/- 1/sqrt(3) or
approximately +/- 0.6, or 1.2 out of 2, i.e. 60%.
Thanks,
Diyu
On 2023-12-08 02:17, Wang, Fuqiang via Star-fcv-l wrote:
Hi Diyu,
So the central issue is whether you get the maximum variation. If
one
varies towards only one side, and quote +/- assuming the variation
is
symmetric, then you?re really assuming the result to lie between
min
def-diff and max diff+diff, so you should quote def +/-
diff/sqrt(3).
Best regards,
Fuqiang
On Dec 7, 2023, at 1:08?PM, Wang, Fuqiang <fqwang AT purdue.edu<mailto:fqwang AT purdue.edu>>
wrote:
?---- External Email: Use caution with attachments, links, or
sharing
data ----
Hi Diyu,
I realize that there may be a misunderstanding on the term ?max.
variation?. It means variations in cuts that result in maximum
variation in result.
Regarding sqrt(12) vs sqrt(3):
If one believes def. is min and sys. is max, then it?s probably
better
to quote the average of def. and sys. as the central value and +/-
diff/sqrt(12) as the error.
If there?s strong reason to quote the value to be the min. (or
max.
for that matter) and the negative side error is really zero, then
we
should quote the value as def.+diff/sqrt(3) not sqrt(12) because
the
common understanding of error is that it covers 68% probability.
Best regards,
Fuqiang
On Dec 7, 2023, at 10:50?AM, dshen <dshen AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov<mailto:dshen AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>>
wrote:
?[You don't often get email from dshen AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov<mailto:dshen AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>. Learn
why
this is important at
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2F*2Faka.ms*2FLearnAboutSenderIdentification__*3B!!P4SdNyxKAPE!HrVa2wHd3fzH5a6Dr0kh6WgIrrU2y5XXz4t2XzuC3J9-Pwp1Dh9szY1HZyJ18mNbUqk5PWsV8mJ1HGVk7kTAs3ZK0w*24&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=BudDVYUCNGX5mhUtidYB5bk1KS3t6q2pK3vMrMqdkak*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz94OX8Ck7w$
]
---- External Email: Use caution with attachments, links, or
sharing
data ----
Hi Fuqiang,
One sigma is |def.-sys.|/sqrt(12), and it shows as +- 1 sigma for
the
case of (def. - |def.-sys.|, def. + |def.-sys.|).
The critical point is that it doesn't require a maximum variation,
it
just requires that the variation could cover the true value. The
confidence level is based on experience and common sense, there is
no
mathematical way to quantify it - it is not statistics.
Best,
Diyu
On 2023-12-07 23:28, Wang, Fuqiang wrote:
Hi Diyu,
What you wrote is just another way to say that the physics
quantity
in
question is within the min and max of (def. - |def.-sys.|, def.
+
|def.-sys.|), respectively. In such a case, one would quote a
sigma
of
2*|def.-sys.|/sqrt(12) = |def.-sys.|/sqrt(3). The essential point
is
to demonstrate to reasonable confidence that this is indeed the
maximum syst. variation in the result.
Best regards,
Fuqiang
On Dec 7, 2023, at 6:32?AM, dshen via Star-fcv-l
<star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>> wrote:
?---- External Email: Use caution with attachments, links, or
sharing
data ----
Hi Fuqiang, Zhiwan and all,
It was a inspiring discussion on the systematic uncertainty
calculations
yesterday, it pushes me to think.
I tend to agree with Zhiwan and what the blind-analysis did,
i.e.
use
denominator of 1/sqrt(12).
The argument was that one shouldn't divide the variation by
1/sqrt(12)
because the variation isn't proved to be the maximum - minimum,
I
think
there is a misunderstanding of the reason behind it.
It isn't based on the assumption that the variation is maximum -
minimum, the underlying assumption is that the true value falls
within
"default cut" +- "variation".
Let's take an example, say, the default cut is DCA<2, and the
systematic
cut is DCA<1.
The assumption is that the non-biased value is in the interval
of
(def.
- |def.-sys.|, def. + |def.-sys.|), and it can be any value in
that
interval with equal probability (uniform distribution) assuming
we
don't
have any pre-knowledge to the best position. That's the reason
of
why
people assign |def.-sys.|/sqrt(12) as 1 sigma and use two-side
band.
It hasn't to be the maximum - minimum, although it isn't
incorrect
technically to use larger uncertainty, say, use Dca<0.1 to
Dca<100.
But
I think the principal is to provide the best estimate instead of
the
most conservative value.
What variation can be considered as reasonable? I think it is
based
on
experience and common sense to a specific physics topic. For CME
study,
like what Zhiwan did, it is reasonable to assume the non-biased
value
falls with in DCA<2 +- |DCA<2 - DCA<1|, for example.
That's my two cents.
Best,
Diyu
On 2023-12-06 05:10, Zhiwan Xu via Star-fcv-l wrote:
Dear Conveners,
I would like to update the paper proposal on the CME search in
STAR
BES-II.
Please kindly add me to the schedule.
The paper proposal webpage:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Fdrupal.star.bnl.gov*2FSTAR*2Fblog*2Fzhiwanxu*2FPaper-Proposal-Search-Chiral-Magnetic-Effect-RHIC-Beam-Energy-Scan-II&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=XPxElSkqRxWGoWxH*2BbQZ2*2FGlr0MXUUw3G1fUItAsYL0*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJQ!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz94kDExI4w$
The slides:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Fdrupal.star.bnl.gov*2FSTAR*2Fsystem*2Ffiles*2Fpaper_proposal_CME_BESII_v2.pdf&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=2y1vzawzEBBmUmaFllAHSsAPx*2BiL38AXrzvRHIuSuuM*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz94i7R49rg$
Best,
Zhiwan
------------------------------------
Zhiwan Xu,
Department of Physics and Astronomy, UCLA
zhiwanxu AT physics.ucla.edu<mailto:zhiwanxu AT physics.ucla.edu>
----- Original Message -----
From: "subhash via Star-fcv-l" <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>>
To: "STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG"
<star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>>
Cc: "subhash" <subhash AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov<mailto:subhash AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>>
Sent: Sunday, December 3, 2023 11:21:34 PM
Subject: [Star-fcv-l] FCV PWG meeting on 06/December/2023 Wed.
9:30
AM
EDT
Dear All,
We shall have our weekly FCV PWG meeting this Wednesday
(06/Dec/2023)
at
9:30 AM EDT. If you would like to present please let us know.
Please
try
posting your slides by Tuesday. The agenda will be collected
at:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Fdrupal.star.bnl.gov*2FSTAR*2Fblog*2Fjjiastar*2Fbulkcorr&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=bAiiaqpKBnYB0QTGpieQn1nDsJhS1Yg9iUgYrkH3xuI*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz959K8iK9A$
Zoom details are copied below.
Thanks and regards,
Prithwish, Zhenyu and Subhash
ZOOM LINK FOR FCV MEETING:
Join ZoomGov Meeting
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2F*2Fbnl.zoomgov.com*2Fj*2F1612377416*3Fpwd*3DV3kvcnN5ZTRLVEc4U01QWUUycDQ1UT09__*3B!!P4SdNyxKAPE!Av9BM9pZUBzjZ_00gC1v6T-rpsdGpwGXddNo2NvBobwjtpFEHdX8vla8TPZfmG4ld-LS-FpqRe7vqLmI9mb3UG7nFqyunx-QfA*24&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=NqoVbniQ1EacmFFwOmEQAXGcxGZuEpcPZxJVz4jZ6YM*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz94kdUEnqg$
Meeting ID: 161 237 7416
Passcode: 106847
One tap mobile
+16692545252,,1612377416#,,,,*106847# US (San Jose)
+16468287666,,1612377416#,,,,*106847# US (New York)
Dial by your location
+1 669 254 5252 US (San Jose)
+1 646 828 7666 US (New York)
+1 551 285 1373 US
+1 669 216 1590 US (San Jose)
Meeting ID: 161 237 7416
Passcode: 106847
Find your local number:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2F*2Fbnl.zoomgov.com*2Fu*2FabVqdu5fbU__*3B!!P4SdNyxKAPE!Av9BM9pZUBzjZ_00gC1v6T-rpsdGpwGXddNo2NvBobwjtpFEHdX8vla8TPZfmG4ld-LS-FpqRe7vqLmI9mb3UG7nFqxQ4jG3og*24&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=8MRf00a7PkGJ5HcODQ5eoXYTc*2BgvRP*2Fw*2FlYek4TEPEw*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJQ!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz966j-u1uA$
Join by SIP
1612377416 AT sip.zoomgov.com<mailto:1612377416 AT sip.zoomgov.com>
Join by H.323
161.199.138.10 (US West)
161.199.136.10 (US East)
Meeting ID: 161 237 7416
Passcode: 106847
_______________________________________________
Star-fcv-l mailing list
Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Flists.bnl.gov*2Fmailman*2Flistinfo*2Fstar-fcv-l&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=lPev6xz1K58v73G*2FNKWvq4crD1TXbB1ouv4Cvnu1owk*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz95zIqIBuQ$
_______________________________________________
Star-fcv-l mailing list
Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Flists.bnl.gov*2Fmailman*2Flistinfo*2Fstar-fcv-l&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=lPev6xz1K58v73G*2FNKWvq4crD1TXbB1ouv4Cvnu1owk*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz95zIqIBuQ$
_______________________________________________
Star-fcv-l mailing list
Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Flists.bnl.gov*2Fmailman*2Flistinfo*2Fstar-fcv-l&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=lPev6xz1K58v73G*2FNKWvq4crD1TXbB1ouv4Cvnu1owk*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz95zIqIBuQ$
_______________________________________________
Star-fcv-l mailing list
Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Flists.bnl.gov*2Fmailman*2Flistinfo*2Fstar-fcv-l&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=lPev6xz1K58v73G*2FNKWvq4crD1TXbB1ouv4Cvnu1owk*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz95zIqIBuQ$
_______________________________________________
Star-fcv-l mailing list
Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto:Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https*3A*2F*2Flists.bnl.gov*2Fmailman*2Flistinfo*2Fstar-fcv-l&data=05*7C01*7Cfqwang*40purdue.edu*7Cca67385d4e4e4100d70d08dbf781ba32*7C4130bd397c53419cb1e58758d6d63f21*7C0*7C0*7C638375909723354002*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000*7C*7C*7C&sdata=lPev6xz1K58v73G*2FNKWvq4crD1TXbB1ouv4Cvnu1owk*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EE6P4IcxD2CGtIkvGoWEbh_8iThLD7-X4g-AEpON_ZWxwjZ6vhkceqWoz9t99yPU2PwymcLAlb0CPwqq46WIz95zIqIBuQ$
Links:
------
[1]
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification__;!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EjpBbeU0hZJonbaEgO1BIObB5ChakAucmBia_AjoDrMf0hNjZDd4P5OIhSJhG7y7GBJB_Ydydq8Rx5YipZVhK98$
[2]
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification__;!!P4SdNyxKAPE!HrVa2wHd3fzH5a6Dr0kh6WgIrrU2y5XXz4t2XzuC3J9-Pwp1Dh9szY1HZyJ18mNbUqk5PWsV8mJ1HGVk7kTAs3ZK0w$
[3]
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/zhiwanxu/Paper-Proposal-Search-Chiral-Magnetic-Effect-RHIC-Beam-Energy-Scan-II
[4]
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/paper_proposal_CME_BESII_v2.pdf
[5] https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/jjiastar/bulkcorr
[6]
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://bnl.zoomgov.com/j/1612377416?pwd=V3kvcnN5ZTRLVEc4U01QWUUycDQ1UT09__;!!P4SdNyxKAPE!Av9BM9pZUBzjZ_00gC1v6T-rpsdGpwGXddNo2NvBobwjtpFEHdX8vla8TPZfmG4ld-LS-FpqRe7vqLmI9mb3UG7nFqyunx-QfA$
[7]
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://bnl.zoomgov.com/u/abVqdu5fbU__;!!P4SdNyxKAPE!Av9BM9pZUBzjZ_00gC1v6T-rpsdGpwGXddNo2NvBobwjtpFEHdX8vla8TPZfmG4ld-LS-FpqRe7vqLmI9mb3UG7nFqxQ4jG3og$
[8] https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fcv-l
_______________________________________________
Star-fcv-l mailing list
Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov<mailto: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<mailto:Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fcv-l
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.bnl.gov/pipermail/star-fcv-l/attachments/20231211/8adaa39a/attachment.htm%3E
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Star-fcv-l mailing list
Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fcv-l
------------------------------
End of Star-fcv-l Digest, Vol 40, Issue 22
******************************************
- Re: [Star-fcv-l] Star-fcv-l Digest, Vol 40, Issue 22, gpwang, 12/10/2023
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.