STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

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

Dear Subhash,

Thanks for your nice comments.

I have made the suggested modifications to the figures.

> About P_yc0 and P_yc2, I was wondering is there any motivation for
> showing both of them. The measurements are very nice, I am wondering
> is there any physics we can disentangle with these two values? Or is
> it merely a cross-check.
P_yc0 represents the global polarization obtained using different 
acceptance correction methods ("Method1 P_yc0" and "Method2 P_yc0"), 
which differ from the classic acceptance correction method ("PH"). In 
the classic method, we assume the Lambda distribution in the transverse 
plane is uniform. However, in the new acceptance correction method, it 
is considered that the global polarization distribution of Lambda in the 
transverse plane may be non-uniform and influenced by elliptic flow, 
taking into account factors such as the azimuthal angle dependence of 
the polarization. Therefore, Figure 7 serves as a cross-check for these 
acceptance correction methods.
P_yc2 reflects the phi dependence of global polarization after 
acceptance correction.
P_yc0 and P_yc2 represent different observations.

> line 349: Could you remind me which paper or analysis [61] are you 
> referring to?
The analysis in [61] refers to arXiv:2311.09698v1, which is Vipul’s 
proceedings. I have updated the reference accordingly.

> Fig. 9: How do you do the average for 20-50% centrality? I see the
> Xi-via daughter (blue) are consistently larger than zero, while direct
> Xi's (red) are smaller than zero. But when you averaged the pattern
> flipped. Can you double check.
Sorry for the mistake with the colors, The error has now been corrected.

> Can we compare the xi-polarization between isobar and Au+Au, although
> the error bar may not allow but I was wondering where they stand,
> especially Xi-via-daughter?
For Xi-via-daughter:
In isobar: P_{\Xi}(%) = 0.61 ± 0.21 (stat.) ± 0.04 (syst.)
In Au+Au: P_{\Xi}(%) = 0.63 ± 0.11 (stat.) ± 0.26 (syst.)
I have included the comparison figure in the analysis note.

> I would also suggest preparing supplemental data points or figures for
> lambda anti-lambda polarization separately for Ru+Ru and Zr+Zr. This
> would be important for someone outside STAR who don't have access to
> individuals collision species.
The values for Lambda and anti-Lambda polarization for Ru+Ru and Zr+Zr 
are listed in lines 281-284, so we have not included these data points 
in the figure.

Please let me know if there are any further suggestions or 
clarifications needed.
The latest draft of the paper can be found here:
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/xgou/Paper-proposal-global-polarization-isobar-collisions-webpage

Thank you very much.

Best regards,
Xingrui


> Dear Xingrui, PAs,
>
> It is great to see the isobar global polarization paper getting ready.
> I have a few comments for your consideration:
>
> Fig. 1: Are these only fit lines.  It might be good, if you draw them
> as points. Also make sure X,Y axis are not touching the labels.
>
> Fig. 4-5: In data/model comparison figures, you have four cases Lambda
> and s-quark  scenario for lambda and anti-lambda in different colors,
> it would be good to label the model in a better way or at least
> mention the color coding in the caption.
>
> Azimuthal angle dependence line 332-336: I think we should not discuss
> the STAR preliminary results in a paper. Although it is a pity that we
> don't have P_yc2 from Au+Au published yet.
>
> About P_yc0 and P_yc2, I was wondering is there any motivation for
> showing both of them. The measurements are very nice, I am wondering
> is there any physics we can disentangle with these two values? Or is
> it merely a cross-check.
>
> line 349: Could you remind me which paper or analysis [61] are you 
> referring to?
>
> Fig. 9: How do you do the average for 20-50% centrality? I see the
> Xi-via daughter (blue) are consistently larger than zero, while direct
> Xi's (red) are smaller than zero. But when you averaged the pattern
> flipped. Can you double check.
> Can we comapre the xi-polarization between isobar and Au+Au, although
> the error bar may not allow but I was wondering where they stand,
> especially Xi-via-daughter?
>
> I would also suggest preparing supplemental data points or figures for
> lambda anti-lambda polarization separately for Ru+Ru and Zr+Zr. This
> would be important for someone outside STAR who don't have access to
> individuals collision species.
>
>
> I sign-off with these addressed.
>
> Thanks and regards,
> Subhash
>
>
> On 2024-07-30 09:37 AM, xgou wrote:
> > Dear conveners,
> >
> >   I hope this email finds you well.
> >
> >   It has been over two weeks since I submitted the GPC request, and I
> > am writing to inquire about its current status. Could you kindly
> > inform me if there has been any progress in the review process?
> >
> >   Additionally, please let me know if there are any further materials
> > or information I need to provide to facilitate the evaluation.
> >
> >   Thank you very much. I look forward to your response.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Xingrui
> >
> > > Dear FCV Conveners,
> > >
> > >   We would like to request the GPC formation for our paper titled
> > > "Hyperon Polarization in Isobar Ru+Ru and Zr+Zr Collisions at \snn =
> > > 200 GeV." Our target journal for this submission is Physics Letters B
> > > (PLB).
> > >
> > >   The latest draft of the paper can be found here:
> > >
> > > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/STAR_Isobar_Polarization%20%285%29.pdf
> > >
> > >   The latest draft of analysis note can be found here:
> > >   
> > > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/AnalysisNote_isobarPH_v2_0.pdf
> > >
> > >   Additionally, the paper proposal blog, which includes the proposed
> > > figures, paper draft, analysis note, and other relevant details, can
> > > be accessed here：
> > >
> > > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/xgou/Paper-proposal-global-polarization-isobar-collisions-webpage
> > >
> > >   Please let us know if you have any comments or suggestions from 
> > > your
> > > end so that we can proceed with moving this paper towards 
> > > publication.
> > >
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > > Xingrui Gou