STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

["Zuowen Liu" <zuowen.liu AT qq.com>]

Dear Subhash,

I tested reducing half of rapidity bins, as shown in the attached figure.

K- v1 looks smoother.

Can we propose to reduce rapidity bins for K- in the later analysis?

The large statistic error would be reduced and give smoother v1.

Best regards,

Zuowen for PAs

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

From: "Zuowen Liu" <zuowen.liu AT qq.com>;

Date: Tue, Apr 23, 2024 03:09 PM

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

Cc: "star-fcv-l"<star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>;"liuzw"<liuzw AT mails.ccnu.edu.cn>;

Subject: Re: [Star-fcv-l] Kaon anti-flow paper draft and analysis notes for PWG review

Dear Subhash and All,

Thank you for the reply.

The Fig. 42 you mentioned might be an old plot.

Please find the new AN in the updated one:

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

And the draft is also updated: https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/Kaon_AntiFlow.pdf

v1(y) in small pT bins also can be found in slide 3, there is no obvious discontinuous unlike v1(y) in the wide pT bin (slide 2).

I don't think the possible discontinuous in the for-rapidity (pT > 0.7) would impact on the physic message we deliver. Because cubic fitting is applied, the for-rapidity v1 is described by the cubic term.

But we focus on dv1/dy in the mid-rapidity in this analysis.

We can't discard v1 at low pT (pT < 0.6), since anti-flow is only observed at low pT.

Anyway, I will redo the PID study for Kaon. It might be the most possible issue from my side.

Thank you again for your prudence.

Best regards,

Zuowen for PAs

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

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

Date: Tue, Apr 23, 2024 09:32 AM

To: "Zuowen Liu"<zuowen.liu AT qq.com>;

Cc: "star-fcv-l"<star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>;"liuzw"<liuzw AT mails.ccnu.edu.cn>;

Subject: Re: [Star-fcv-l] Kaon anti-flow paper draft and analysis notes for PWG review

Dear Zuowen, PAs,

Thanks again for your response. We are a bit uncomfortable with this
kaon data and feel that the present trend is beyond statistical
fluctuation. We suggest the PAs investigate the reason for this
discontinuity or propose some solution.

I am checking v1 versus y in smaller pt bins (Fig. 42 of AN), there is a
non-trivial trend especially obvious at pt= 0.4-0.6 GeV. I would suggest
to look differentially in (pt, eta) to understand the reason. Also in a
hypothetical scenario, if we remove problematic bins (eg stay within
y_cm < 0.5 or pt > 0.6), how would it impact our significance and
physics message?

In the next iteration, please also circulate updated version of AN and
draft.

Thanks and regards,
Subhash

On 2024-04-22 04:02 PM, Zuowen Liu wrote:
> Dear Subhash,
>
> Thanks a lot for your quick reply.
> Kindly find the answers in the slides attached.
> Thank you.
>
> Best regards,
> Zuowen for PAs
>
> ------------------ Original ------------------
>
> From:  "subhash"<subhash AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>;
> Date:  Thu, Apr 18, 2024 01:46 PM
> To:  "Zuowen Liu"<liuzw AT mails.ccnu.edu.cn>;
> Cc:  "star-fcv-l"<star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>;
> Subject:  Re: [Star-fcv-l] Kaon anti-flow paper draft and analysis
> notes for PWG review
>
> Dear Zuowen,
>
> Thanks for your response. I have a few follow up questions/comments:
>
> 1) Kaon v1: your negative kaon points especially at 3.5 GeV are kind
> of
> fluctuating bin by bin, they look a lot smoother in 3 GeV data. The
> systematic is also changing bin-by-bin. Since this paper is focussed
> on
> kaons, I wanted to understand more on this behavior of K+ and K-. How
> do
> you understand the current behavior.
> 2) Proton v1: I am fine with it, please update all the latest version
> of
> figures.
> 3) v1 versus invariant mass for kshort: I would suggest to check the
> variation with background shape eg first/second order polynomial.
> 4) incompressibility: do you use K=210 (soft EOS) for all the
> energies?
> If I remember in our prior 3 GeV paper, we used K=380 (I believe hard
> EOS).
> I would suggest to mention K values used in JAM in the main
> manuscript.
> 5) Since you are aiming for a letter, you don't have space. So I
> suggested to include event plane resolution and v1 versus pt figures
> as
> a supplemental materials to PRL.
> 6) around 196-197 of the draft, you should clarify that W/O spectator
> is
> the case where spectator interactions are turned off in JAM.
>
> Thanks and regards,
> Subhash
>
> On 2024-04-17 04:09 PM, Zuowen Liu wrote:
>> Dear Subhash and All,
>>
>> Thank you very much for your nice suggestions.
>> Please find the answers in the slides attached.
>>
>> Kindly let us know if you have any further comments or suggestions.
>>
>> Thanks and Best regards,
>> Zuowen for PAs
>>
>> ------------------ Original ------------------
>>
>> From:  "subhash"<subhash AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>;
>> Date:  Sun, Apr 14, 2024 06:28 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] Kaon anti-flow paper draft and analysis
>> notes for PWG review
>>
>> Dear Zuowen, PAs,
>>
>> Sorry for the delay. Thanks a lot for circulating this interesting
>> paper
>> and supporting materials. Overall, we have everything to move
> forward.
>>
>> But I have the following question/comments for your consideration:
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> Analysis Note:
>>
>> Major:
>> -- As seen in Fig 59 and 60, the kaon-minus v1 have a discontinuity
> at
>>
>> around y_cm ~ -0.7. It is also part of your main figure in paper.
> What
>> I
>> remember you have mentioned in some presentation that there was some
>> issue in mass-square in eToF. Was it related and can you please
> remind
>>
>> me again how it was solved/addressed?
>>
>> -- page-46: Fig. 65: The proton v1 has a bump structure at around
> ycm
>> ~
>> -0.4. How do you understand it? Do you see a same structure for
>> lambda?
>>
>> -- page-11: You should have purity numbers for all your PIDs, please
>> add
>> them in your note. Note that there was a recent presentation from
>> Cameron Racz on the effect of proton purity on v3. Can this affect
>> your
>> analysis?
>>
>> -- page-24: Fig. 24: Can you add a few more example figures for your
>> v1
>> versus invariant mass for kshort and lambda, may be in the Appendix
>> section of AN? Please also add discussion how is v1 the background
>> shape
>> is considered. Have you varied v1^background to get systematic on v1
>> for
>> kshort and lambda?
>> --------------------------------------------------
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> Paper draft:
>>
>> Major comments:
>> -- If I understand correctly, the main selling point of this paper
> is
>> the observation of anti-flow for pions and kaons at low pT. This
>> manuscript do not rule out the kaon potential causing anti-flow for
>> kaons, but concluded that it could also be driven by nuclear
>> shadowing.
>>
>> abstract: If it is a first time simultaneous observation of
> anti-flow
>> of
>> pions/kaons we could probably stress explicitly in the abstract in a
>> data driven way (what you did around #l 188-190) and then mention it
>> is
>> _supported_ by JAM.
>> l#16: It is concluded --> It is supported, since you haven't ruled
> out
>>
>> kaon potential picture.
>> Is there a way in JAM to demonstrate the sign change in pions/kaons
>> _solely_ from nuclear shadowing, so that you can rule out one
> picture.
>>
>> That might make this paper sending a stronger message.
>>
>> -- Compared to our 3 GeV PLB paper (2108.00908), what information it
>> can
>> bring in terms of baryonic mean-field. Because now we have p/lambda
> v1
>>
>> for four different beam energies. It could be added in the
> conclusion,
>>
>> eg what compressibility values are used.
>>
>> -- Please double check the Kaon data points at 3.5 GeV as I
> mentioned
>> above.
>>
>> -- I remember there was some discrepancies in two versions of JAM.
>> Which
>> version are you using? And it should be pointed out in the
> manuscript
>> if
>> results from JAM (version dependent) changed compared to our
> previous
>> publication.
>>
>> -- You would need a few supplemental figures to discuss on the event
>> plane and its resolutions.
>>
>> -- You could also think about reporting v1 versus pt in your
>> supplemental materials.
>>
>> Minor suggestions:
>> -- Please check notations, sometimes you use "protons" some times
> "p".
>>
>> For instance l#77
>>
>> -- Fig. 4: You should mention rapidity coverages inside the figures,
>> although you are presenting dv1/dy
>> You could draw pi+ as markers, not to confuse with models. You can
>> play
>> with color coding.
>>
>> -- l#196: w/O spectator, have you turned off spectator interactions?
>> Sorry for my ignorance, but I wanted to understand how it was done
> in
>> JAM.
>>
>> Thanks and regards,
>> Subhash
>>
>> On 2024-04-08 03:06 PM, Zuowen Liu via Star-fcv-l wrote:
>>> Dear Conveners and All,
>>>
>>> Here we update some materials for PWG review.
>>> Please let us know any comments and suggestions you may have.
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>> -Paper draft:
>>> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/Kaon_AntiFlow.pdf
>>>
>>> -Analysis notes:
>>>
>>
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/analysisnote_kaonantiflow.pdf
>>> -Analysis code in rcf:
>>> /star/u/liuzw/pwg/kaonAntiflow
>>> -Summary page on drupal:
>>>
>>
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/liuzw/Paper-proposal-kaon-anti-flow
>>> -Replies to pwgc preview comments:
>>>
>>
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/PWGC_preview_kaon_antiflow_ver2.pdf
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Zuowen for PAs
>>>
>>> ------------------ Original ------------------
>>>
>>> From:  "Zuowen Liu"<liuzw AT mails.ccnu.edu.cn>;
>>> Date:  Wed, Feb 28, 2024 03:47 PM
>>> To:  "star-fcv-l"<star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov>;
>>>
>>> Subject:  Kaon anti-flow paper draft and analysis notes for PWG
>> review
>>>
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> The paper daft and analysis notes for Measurements of Kaon
> Anti-flow
>>> in the High Baryon Density Region from Au + Au Collisions at √sNN
>> =
>>> 3 - 3.9 GeV are ready for PWG review.
>>>
>>> -Paper draft:
>>> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/Kaon_AntiFlow.pdf
>>>
>>> -Analysis notes:
>>>
>>
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/analysisnote_kaonantiflow.pdf
>>> -Summary page on drupal:
>>>
>>
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/liuzw/Paper-proposal-kaon-anti-flow
>>>
>>> We’re looking forward to your comments and suggestions.
>>> Thank you!
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Zuowen for PAs
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Star-fcv-l mailing list
>>> Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov
>>> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fcv-l

Attachment: 3p5gev_kaon_v1y.jpg
Description: Binary data