STAR HardProbes PWG

[Rongrong Ma <marr AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>]

Hello Andrew

Your new version reads nice to me as well. Thanks. 

Best
Rongrong

> On Jun 30, 2022, at 9:41 AM, Nihar Sahoo via Star-hp-l 
> <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
> 
> Hello Andrew,
> 
> This shortened version looks good to me.
> Just wait for Rongrong and other conveners' comment today (EDT time) before 
> submitting tomorrow Jul 1st.
> 
> Cheers
> Nihar
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 2022-06-30 02:26, Andrew Tamis wrote:
>> Hello All,
>> I have had to change my abstract to meet submission requirements such
>> as character limit.  I have updated it on the drupal page.  Please let
>> me know if the shortened version is acceptable.
>> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/59931
>> Best,
>> Andrew
>> On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 6:08 AM Nihar Sahoo <nihar AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>
>> wrote:
>>> Hello Andrew,
>>> Once you implement Yi's comment, we can pass your abstract to
>>> startalk.
>>> Regards
>>> Nihar
>>> On 2022-06-22 08:42, Yi Yang wrote:
>>>> Hi Andrew,
>>>> Thanks a lot for the presentation last week. I have a better
>>>> understanding of this analysis now.
>>>> I have some minor comments/suggestions for your consideration.
>>>> L8: Quantum-Chromodynamics --> Quantum Chromodynamics
>>>> L12: By plotting --> From (?)
>>>> L14: low opening  angles -->  small opening  angles
>>>> L20: from both charged tracks from the Time Projec tion Chamber
>>> and
>>>> calorimeter towers from the Barrel Electromagnetic Calorimeter.
>>> -->
>>>> from both charged tracks using Time Projec tion Chamber and Barrel
>>>> Electromagnetic Calorimeter.  (?)
>>>> L24: Move "These measurements will be compared in this talk with
>>> sim
>>>> ulation using PYTHIA to evaluate the observable’s susceptibility
>>> to
>>>> detector effects." to the end of this paragraph. (?)
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Yi
>>>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 2:15 AM Andrew Tamis via Star-hp-l
>>>> <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Sooraj,
>>>>> L25: I did a toy simulation of detector effects by dropping 20%
>>> of
>>>>> charged tracks and running jet finding again, to show that the
>>> shape
>>>>> doesn't change.  And then I did a comparison between data and the
>>>>> PYTHIA 6 official embedding with no simulated detector effects.
>>>>> L27: Done
>>>>> On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 12:39 PM Sooraj Radhakrishnan
>>>>> <skradhakrishnan AT lbl.gov> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Andrew,
>>>>> Thanks for preparing the nice abstract. Just a couple of minor
>>>>> comments from me for sign off
>>>>> L25: full detector simulation with PYTHIA events?
>>>>> L27: showcase --> study
>>>>> Sooraj
>>>>> On Sat, Jun 18, 2022 at 8:32 AM Nihar Sahoo via Star-hp-l
>>>>> <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>>>>> Hello Andrew,
>>>>> Please find my additional comments.
>>>>> Line#2: In title , "…GeV  in  STAR"  -> looks like there are
>>> extra
>>>>> space
>>>>> between "GeV__in__STAR", would you please check this?
>>>>> Line#19: p+p -> $p+p$ (italic)
>>>>> Line#19-20: "   This talk will present  analysis done with jets
>>>>> reconstructed.. " -> "This talk will present a measurement of
>>> jets
>>>>> reconstructed…"
>>>>> Line#22: "…approximately …" -> Not sure why it is required to
>>>>> mention
>>>>> "approximately" here? Is there any reason?
>>>>>> 8. I use N-point as it is what the attached reference i used
>>>>> called
>>>>>> them, I think it may be better to maintain cohesion
>>>>> Ok, That is fine.
>>>>>> 10. By Scaling behavior, I mean the expected shape of the curve
>>> in
>>>>>> that region due to theory predictions.  It is the language used
>>> in
>>>>> my
>>>>>> reference, should I do more to introduce it here?  Perhaps I can
>>>>> just
>>>>>> change it to curve shape.
>>>>> I was trying to understand this "scaling behavior" from that
>>> paper;
>>>>> I
>>>>> will read it again later.
>>>>> At this moment you can just keep it as it is.
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Nihar
>>>>> On 2022-06-18 02:37, Andrew Tamis wrote:
>>>>>> Hello Nihar,
>>>>>> Thank you very much for the feedback!
>>>>>> 1. Done
>>>>>> 2. Done
>>>>>> 3. Done
>>>>>> 4. Done
>>>>>> 5. Done
>>>>>> 6. Done
>>>>>> 7. Done, and attached reference
>>>>>> 8. I use N-point as it is what the attached reference i used
>>>>> called
>>>>>> them, I think it may be better to maintain cohesion
>>>>>> 9. Done
>>>>>> 10. By Scaling behavior, I mean the expected shape of the curve
>>> in
>>>>>> that region due to theory predictions.  It is the language used
>>> in
>>>>> my
>>>>>> reference, should I do more to introduce it here?  Perhaps I can
>>>>> just
>>>>>> change it to curve shape.
>>>>>> 11. By the time of the talk, I may not have unfolding ready at a
>>>>> level
>>>>>> that I am willing to show, but I still believe it is helpful to
>>>>>> mention that I will show data, and the sentence mentioning
>>> "first
>>>>>> studies" may be vague enough to not overrepresent what I will be
>>>>>> bringing.  I believe that showing that the detector level data
>>>>>> exhibits the same behavior to constituent pt cuts as the PYTHIA
>>>>>> simulations contains useful information.
>>>>>> 12. Done
>>>>>> 13. Done
>>>>>> 14. Done
>>>>>> 15. Done
>>>>>> 16. Done
>>>>>> 17. Done
>>>>>> I have made these changes and several others that were
>>> suggested.
>>>>> The
>>>>>> updated abstract is here
>> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/presentations/DNP-2022/Correlators-pp-Collisions-Sqrts200GeV-STAR
>>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>> Andrew Tamis
>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 6:14 AM Nihar Sahoo via Star-hp-l
>>>>>> <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hello Andrew,
>>>>>>> Thank you for your plan to perform this new measurement in
>>> STAR.
>>>>>>> Please find my comment and suggestions on your abstract.
>>>>>>> 1. Title- "Correlators in pp Collisions at √s = 200GeV from
>>>>> STAR"
>>>>>>> I think title needs more information to convey about
>>> "N-particle
>>>>>>> energy
>>>>>>> correlator in jet".
>>>>>>> Something like "Measurement of energy correlators within jet in
>>>>> p+p
>>>>>>> collisions at √s = 200GeV in STAR"
>>>>>>> Or "Measurement of 2-particle energy correlators within jet in
>>>>> p+p
>>>>>>> collisions at √s = 200GeV in STAR"
>>>>>>> 2. Andrew Tamis -> Andrew Tamis (for the STAR collaboration)
>>>>>>> 3. "Within high energy collisions, Jets are a unique…"
>>>>>>> -> "Jet is a unique…hard-scattered quarks and gluons in high
>>>>>>> energy
>>>>>>> collision experiment."
>>>>>>> 4."…in Jet-finding…" -> "… in jet-finding.."
>>>>>>> 5."..allow for increased study…" -> "…allow for detailed
>>>>>>> study…"
>>>>>>> 6."…the quark/gluon shower, fragmentation, and
>>>>>>> the resulting final hadrons." -> "the quark/gluon shower,
>>>>>>> fragmentation,
>>>>>>> and the hadronization in the Quantum-Chromodynamics."
>>>>>>> 7. "…within jets defines an observable that probes…" ->
>>> need
>>>>> to
>>>>>>> introduce here what is that observable ? For example,
>>> "…within
>>>>>>> jets
>>>>>>> defines an observable, the N-particle energy correlator in jet,
>>>>> that
>>>>>>> probes…" ; the introduction of this observable may need
>>>>> reference
>>>>>>> so
>>>>>>> please provide reference of previous study.
>>>>>>> 8. "N-point" ->  "N-particle" would be clearer.
>>>>>>> 9. "re-contextualize" -> "recontextualize"
>>>>>>> 10. "By plotting the 2-point energy correlator as a function of
>>>>>>> opening
>>>>>>> angle, one can determine the crossover region from where the
>>>>> scaling
>>>>>>> behavior of the correlator changes from scaling as a random
>>>>>>> distribution
>>>>>>> of hadrons at low opening angles, to scaling as quarks and
>>> gluons
>>>>>>> dominated by perturbative interactions at large opening
>>> angles."
>>>>> ->
>>>>>>> Please break this statement and paraphrase it. Not sure what is
>>>>> this
>>>>>>> "scaling"?
>>>>>>> 11. Second para, I would prefer to start with "In this talk,
>>> the
>>>>>>> study
>>>>>>> of 2-point energy correlator in jet will be discussed using
>>>>> PYTHIA
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> STAR grant simulation using kinematic coverage of the STAR
>>>>>>> experiment."
>>>>>>> (Or Something similar to this) So that we will not be saying
>>>>>>> explicitly
>>>>>>> to show the results from p+p data at this moment in the
>>> abstract.
>>>>>>> But at
>>>>>>> the end this abstract, you could mention STAR plan to perform
>>>>> this
>>>>>>> analysis where you could show some preliminary plots in your
>>> talk
>>>>> if
>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>> could have by that time. [I think this what we discussed at our
>>>>> last
>>>>>>> meeting]. Please let me know what do you think.
>>>>>>> 12. "The correlation functions were approximated.." -> "The
>>>>>>> correlation
>>>>>>> functions are approximate…"
>>>>>>> 13. "…y-φ space…" -> "… rapidity-azimuthal angle phase
>>>>>>> space…"
>>>>>>> 14. "…approximated via multiplicity histograms of the opening
>>>>>>> angle…" ->
>>>>>>> "…approximated by the distribution of the opening angle…
>>>>>>> 15. "simulations in PYTHIA" -> "simulation using PYTHIA"
>>>>>>> 16. "selections on overall" -> "selections on the overall"
>>>>>>> 17. "pT" -> "transverse momentum ($ p_{\rm T}$)"
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Nihar
>>>>>>> On 2022-06-11 02:10, webmaster--- via Star-hp-l wrote:
>>>>>>>> Dear Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
>>>>>>>> Andrew Tamis (andrew.tamis AT yale.edu) has submitted a material
>>>>> for
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> review,
>>>>>>>> please have a look:
>>>>>>>> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/59931
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>> If you have any problems with the review process, please
>>> contact
>>>>>>>> webmaster AT www.star.bnl.gov
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Star-hp-l mailing list
>>>>>>>> Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
>>>>>>>> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Star-hp-l mailing list
>>>>>>> Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
>>>>>>> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Star-hp-l mailing list
>>>>> Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
>>>>> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l
>>>>> --
>>>>> 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
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Star-hp-l mailing list
>>>> Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
>>>> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l
>>>> Links:
>>>> ------
>>>> [1] tel:%28510%29%20495-2473
> _______________________________________________
> Star-hp-l mailing list
> Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l