STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

[Achyut Khanal <hp4820 AT wayne.edu>]

Dear Subhash,

Thanks for going through materials and signing off with a few minor suggestions. We are still waiting to hear news from conveners side about the GPC formation. As a follow up, could you please let us know about the current status on the GPC formation for this paper? 

In the meantime, I updated the paper webpage https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/akhanal/Paper-Longitudinal-flow-plane-decorrelation-multiple-plane-cumulants-STAR with new version of paper draft, analysis note, and figure PDF by implementing your suggestions. 

Regarding your question about quoting centrality integrated T_2 or T_3: If quoting a quantitive centrality integrated value is helpful then we can do so for T_2 calculated using TPCs and EPDs (as we see a hint of small but negative number only in these measurements but all other measurements are consistent with zero) and include that in the summary and discussion section.

Sincerely,

Achyut Khanal 

On Aug 2, 2024, at 5:05 AM, subhash <subhash AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov> wrote:

[EXTERNAL]

Dear Achyut, PAs,

Thanks for preparing very comprehensive materials, and the paper draft
is in very good shape. I sign-off with a few minor suggestions for your
consideration:


1. Datassets and event selection, you could consider adding Au+Au event
selection as well. I think the current limits are only for isobar
analysis. The Au+Au data is used in Fig. 9 as far as I see.

2. The section on systematic uncertainty, maybe you can list the nominal
cuts and variations in tables instead of bullet (but it's your choice).
I would also like to bring to your attention that it is suggested by
PWGC that if we use a sqrt(12) method for systematic uncertainty, it
should be verified that the assumptions are valid. Probably in your
case, it doesn't matter and dominated by statistics.
"Quoting systematic uncertainties in STAR results and measurements
    - Some results/groups use differences between variations divided by
sqrt(12) as the systematic uncertainty while others quote just the
difference
    - Dividing by sqrt(12) relies on some assumptions - that the
variation is uniformly distributed and that the change of cuts capture
the range of variations. For the cases that divide the difference by
sqrt(12) it should be shown that the assumptions are satisfied"

3. Should we quote centrality integrated T_2 or T_3 values along the
summary and discussion section? Although you have it in your figures.
The data points are fluctuating due to statistics and it is bit
difficult to gauge the small but negative number, a quantitative
centrality integrated number might help.

4. The figures and labelling are bit small, it may not fit PRC
requirement. Please increase them.

Thanks and regards,
Subhash


On 2024-07-17 12:09 AM, Achyut Khanal wrote:

Dear FCV Conveners,

We would like to request GPC formation for our paper "Longitudinal
flow-plane decorrelation from multiple-plane cumulants with STAR”.
Our target journal is PRC.

Latest draft of paper can be found here:
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/star_deco_PRC_draft_jul16.pdf

Latest draft of analysis note can be found here:
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/analysis_note_decorrelation_jul16.pdf


The paper proposal blog with proposed figures and and other details
can be found here:

https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/akhanal/Paper-Longitudinal-flow-plane-decorrelation-multiple-plane-cumulants-STAR


Please let us know if you have any comments, suggestions from your end
so that we can move this paper forward towards publication.

Sincerely,
Achyut Khanal