STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

[Shengli Huang <shengli.huang AT stonybrook.edu>]

Dear Yicheng,

Thank you for sharing these results. I have two comments:

1. Track Merging Effect:
   It would be helpful to show the results with ∣Δηa,b∣>0.2 or even >0.4 for both v2{2} and c3p, as your Fig. 2 still indicates a significant track merging effect. I am concerned about whether this could influence your conclusions. If you have results with larger ∣Δη∣>0.2 or >0.4 for Fig. 1, Fig. 2, and Fig. 3, it would be extremely helpful to include them.

2. Nonflow Estimation:
   For the nonflow corrections, you used a 1-D fit for v2{2} and HIJING for c3p. It is essential to demonstrate whether these approaches are effective. I suggest:

   • Adding the real data c3p to Fig. 2(b) for direct comparison.
   • Including nonflow estimations for v2{2} by comparing HIJING with real data and aligning these with the 1-D fit results.

This would help strengthen the case for the nonflow subtraction procedure and make it more convincing for the referee.

I hope these suggestions are helpful!

Best regards,
Shengli

On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 2:08 PM Feng, Yicheng <feng216 AT purdue.edu> wrote:

Hi FCV, 

We had a PWGC preview of the CME paper proposal and got many valuable comments. We’ve documented it here: 

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

We have prepared a paper draft and analysis note. 

paper draft: https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/AuAuFcme_Paper_Pwg_v4.pdf

analysis note: https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/AuAuFcme_Note_Pwg_v4.pdf

More details can also be found on the drupal webpage: 

https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/fengyich/fcme-AuAu-200-GeV-after-background-estimate

If you have any questions/comments, please let us know.

Sincerely,

Yicheng