STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

[psinha <psinha AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>]

Dear Subhash,

Thank you for the response. We are preparing the paper draft and will be 
sending it very soon.

Regards,
Priyanshi (for the PAs)


On 2024-08-02 15:49, subhash wrote:
> Dear Priyanshi, PAs,
>
> Thanks for preparing the responses to the suggestions from PWGC. They
> look good to me.
> Did you posted/prepared a paper draft? Please circulate them as well
> to the list when ready.
>
> Thanks and regards,
> Subhash
>
> On 2024-07-23 12:11 AM, psinha wrote:
> > Dear Convenors and All,
> >
> > After the PWGC preview, we have prepared the replies to the PWGC
> > comments and suggestions. Please find below the link to the replies,
> > updated webpage and analysis note.
> >
> > PWGC comment reply:
> > https://www.star.bnl.gov/protected/bulkcorr/vipul/IsobarFlow/WebPage/pwgcreview/Replies_PWGCpreview.v1.pdf
> >
> > Webpage:
> > https://www.star.bnl.gov/protected/bulkcorr/vipul/IsobarFlow/WebPage/index.html
> >
> > Analysis Note:
> > https://www.star.bnl.gov/protected/bulkcorr/vipul/IsobarFlow/WebPage/analysisnote/AnalysisNote_EllipticFlow_Isobar200GeV_v2.pdf
> >
> > Kindly let us know if you have any comments and suggestions.
> >
> > Thanks and regards,
> > Priyanshi Sinha (for the PAs)
> >
> > On 2024-03-16 01:22, Sooraj Radhakrishnan via Starpapers-l wrote:
> > > Date: 03/15/2024
> > > Participants:  Chitrasen Jena, Priyanshi Sinha, Vipul Bairathi, Ting
> > > Lin, Xiaoxuan Chu, Nu Xu, Prithwish Tribedy, Subhash Singha, Isaac
> > > Mooney, Nihar Sahoo, Yi Yang, Shuai Yang, Yue Hang Leung, Zaochen Ye,
> > > ShinIchi Esumi, Sooraj Radhakrishnan
> > > Title: Elliptic flow of strange and multi-strange hadrons in isobar
> > > collisions at √sNN = 200 GeV at RHIC
> > >
> > > Target journal: Phys. Rev. C
> > >
> > > Proposal page:
> > > https://www.star.bnl.gov/protected/bulkcorr/vipul/IsobarFlow/WebPage/
> > >
> > > Presentation:
> > > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/psinha/PWGC-preview-v2-multi-strange-hadrons-isobar
> > > The PWGC panel previewed the paper proposal from FCV PWG. The panel
> > > found that the analysis is mature and results are important and
> > > interesting, and the paper should move forward. The journal choice 
> > > was
> > > also found to be appropriate. The following points were discussed.
> > > Q: The predictions for the ratio of the initial geometry asymmetry
> > > between the two isobars is much larger the measured ratio of charged
> > > hadron v2 between the two systems (shown on S2). Why is this so? 
> > > Also,
> > > why is there a non monotonous centrality dependence for the ratio?
> > >
> > > A: These are early predictions. Newer calculations agree better with
> > > the measured v2 ratio. Non-monotonous centrality dependence could be
> > > from interplay of difference in multiplicity and difference in
> > > deformation
> > >
> > > Q: The variations in cuts are rather small. This may not reflect the
> > > range of variation of your systematic uncertainty. So dividing by
> > > sqrt(12) could be under-estimating the error. Could vary the cuts 
> > > over
> > > a wider range and see if you are capturing the range of variation
> > >
> > > A: Will evaluate and update
> > > Q: Do you have a table quantifying the magnitude of systematic
> > > uncertainties from various sources?
> > >
> > > A: Not in today's presentation. But have it in the presentations made
> > > to PWG previously. Can include in the analysis note
> > > Q: Can you extend the pT dependent v2 measurements to higher pT?
> > >
> > > A:  The uncertainties get large beyond the bins shown in the plot.
> > > Will see if its possible to measure for higher pT bins
> > >
> > > C: Could show for some of the particles where statistics is good
> > >
> > > A: Yes, will do
> > > Q: On S18 (Fig.11), please zoom in the y-range for the ratio plots 
> > > for
> > > better readability
> > >
> > > A: Yes, will do
> > > Q: The ratio shown on S19 (Fig.12), for eg for K0s, shows enhancement
> > > only above pT = 2 GeV/c. In this case can it be concluded that the
> > > enhancement is from system size dependence of collectivity? Could be
> > > from other effects
> > >
> > > A: We don't have a clear answer for it. Will investigate further
> > >
> > > C: Could calculate the eccentricity scaled v2 and compare between
> > > different systems. This might help to better evaluate the system size
> > > dependence
> > >
> > > A: Yes, will do
> > >
> > > Q: For Rcp, we see a clear system size dependence. Why it is not so
> > > strong for v2
> > >
> > > A: v2 depends more on the event shape than Rcp
> > >
> > > Q: Lambda v2 clearly deviates systematically from the NCQ scaling
> > > (S17). Do we see similar trend in Au+Au?
> > >
> > > A: In Au+Au also we see that overall NCQ scaling holds within 10-15%.
> > > Will check the behavior of Lambda in Au+Au
> > >
> > > C: You see similar deviation for both Lambda and Lambda_bar
> > >
> > > A: Yes, will check further and also in Au+Au
> > > Q: Do you have model comparison to the v2 ratios (S18)?
> > >
> > > A: Model calculations become challenging for different particles as
> > > the error bars are large
> > >
> > > Q: Can you compare to the ratio of initial eccentricities?
> > >
> > > Q: Yes, will check that
> > > Q: The deviations of the AMPT model calculations from data are
> > > significant, particularly for K0s and Lambda (S20). So cannot say
> > > models describe data
> > >
> > > A: Yes, will modify the conclusions accordingly
> > >
> > > C: The large centrality range used could wash out effects of
> > > deformation difference. Could try comparison for more central
> > > collisions
> > >
> > > Q: Do you have AMPT calculations without string melting? Is there a
> > > difference between the two modes?
> > >
> > > A: No, we have the calculations only with string melting. Will do
> > >
> > > Q: For the high pT bins (S15), do you have an estimate of the 
> > > non-flow
> > > contributions? The high pT bins particularly in peripheral centrality
> > > seem to be dominated by non-flow
> > >
> > > A: We don't have an evaluation of the non flow. Will do the 
> > > evaluation
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Sooraj Radhakrishnan
> > >
> > > Research Scientist,
> > > Department of Physics
> > >
> > > Kent State University
> > >  Kent, OH 44243
> > >
> > > Physicist Postdoctoral AffiliateNuclear Science Division
> > > Lawrence Berkeley National Lab
> > > MS70R0319, One Cyclotron Road
> > > Berkeley, CA 94720
> > > Ph: 510-495-2473 [1]
> > >
> > > Email: skradhakrishnan AT lbl.gov
> > >
> > >
> > > Links:
> > > ------
> > > [1] tel:%28510%29%20495-2473
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Starpapers-l mailing list
> > > Starpapers-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> > > https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/starpapers-l