STAR HardProbes PWG

[Yi Yang <yiyang0429 AT gmail.com>]

Hi Monika,

Thanks a lot for the updated one. I don't have any further comments.

Cheers,

Yi

On Fri, Jul 1, 2022 at 1:40 AM Monika Robotková <robotmon AT fjfi.cvut.cz> wrote:

Hi Yi,

Thank you very much for your comments, I've implemented them and uploaded v5 on Drupal page.

Best regards,

Monika

---

Od: Yi Yang <yiyang0429 AT gmail.com>
Odesláno: 30. června 2022 18:49:20
Komu: Monika Robotková; STAR HardProbes PWG
Kopie: Sooraj Radhakrishnan
Předmět: Re: [Star-hp-l] STAR presentation by Monika Robotkova for ICHEP 2022 submitted for review

 

Hi Monika,

Thanks a lot for the nice poster. I only have some very minor comments/suggestions on v2 for your consideration. 

  - SoftDrop box: should "Shared momentum z_g" be at the left of the z_g equation?  Should "Grooming radius R_g ..."  be an extra item? 

  - Comparison box: Leading order MC --> Leading-order MC

 

Cheers,

Yi

On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 9:01 PM Monika Robotková via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi Sooraj,

Thank you for your comments, I've implemented most of them and uploaded v4 on Drupal. To answer your questions:

Conclusions box: what is third/narrow split?

This refers to the blue points in plots in "First, second and third split" box, where you can see in the R_g distribution that third split is also the most narrow.

Conclusions box: The last statement, which plot/physics is it linked to?

This is basically linked to all results and we would like to say that if we select narrow splits, we increase the contribution of non-perturbative corrections to the z_g observables.

Best regards,

Monika

---

Od: Sooraj Radhakrishnan <skradhakrishnan AT lbl.gov>
Odesláno: 28. června 2022 9:09:53
Komu: Monika Robotková; STAR HardProbes PWG
Kopie: Barbara Trzeciak
Předmět: Re: [Star-hp-l] STAR presentation by Monika Robotkova for ICHEP 2022 submitted for review

 

Hi Monika,

   Thanks for preparing the nice poster. Please find a few comments from me below

Abstract: 'dynamics of quarks and gluons' --> fragmentation of quarks and gluons?

third lower box: z_g for different R_g and ... bins

second box on right: do you want to add any text/conclusions here on the MC comparisons?

Conclusions box: what is third/narrow split?

Conclusions box: The last statement, which plot/physics is it linked to?

thanks

Sooraj

On Sun, Jun 26, 2022 at 3:56 AM Monika Robotková via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi Barbara,

Thank you for your useful comments. I've implemented them and uploaded v3 on Drupal page.

Best regards,

Monika

---

Od: Barbara Trzeciak <barbara.trzeciak AT gmail.com>
Odesláno: 24. června 2022 10:42:27
Komu: Nihar Sahoo; STAR HardProbes PWG
Kopie: Monika Robotková; webmaster
Předmět: Re: [Star-hp-l] STAR presentation by Monika Robotkova for ICHEP 2022 submitted for review

 

Hi Monika,

very nice poster.

Please find my comments below.

Cheers,

Barbara

Abstract:

- in pp collisions at √s = 200 GeV -> in pp collisions at √s = 200 GeV in STAR

-  groomed jet radius or split opening angle (Rg) ->  groomed jet radius (Rg) or split opening angle

- Grooming technique used to remove soft wide-angle radiation - please add a reference to grooming/soft drop.

- Rg is the driving factor for the change in shape of zg distributions - I would make it a separate bullet, that's an important conclusion that should be emphasized (you can even make it bold or different color).

- collinear emissions are enhanced - you can also emphasize it in bold or color.

Conclusions:

- Data compared with simulations from different MC generators - it's a bit confusing since you don't show a comparison to MC before this sentence, after searching one find the plots below.

I propose to move above the "Conclusions":  "Comparison with simulations from different MC generators"  and the comparison plots. And you continue with your conclusions.

- Observed significantly harder/symmetric splitting at the third/narrow split compared to the first and second splits - I would say that the significant change is from first to the second and thirst split. From the second to the third split this difference is already milder, isn't it the case ? I would change: compared to the first and second splits  -> compared to the first split 

- Selecting on the split number along the jet clustering tree results in similar change in zg distributions as selecting on Rg at the first split - I had to read it a few times to get the point. If you could think of some easier formulation would be great :), like: z_g distribution can be controlled either by selecting on R_g on the first split or by selecting on the split number. 

- On the MC comparison plots you have different legends for the MC models, I would make them the same so that it's clear that the models (and tunes) used in both cases are the same. Or, since you share legends between the two plots, remove the MC legend from one plot.

- Please also make the two plots the same size and increase the legend for splittings.

On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 5:19 AM Nihar Sahoo via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hello Monika,

Thank you for implementing my comment. I have no further comments and
sign off.
Please wait for other conveners to comment.

Regards
Nihar


On 2022-06-24 04:41, Monika Robotková wrote:
> Hello Nihar,
>
> Thank you for your useful comments, I've implemented them and uploaded
> v2 on Drupal page.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Monika
> -------------------------
>
> Od: Star-hp-l <star-hp-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov> za uživatele Nihar
> Sahoo via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
> Odesláno: 23. června 2022 12:58:10
> Komu: webmaster AT star.bnl.gov; STAR HardProbes PWG
> Předmět: Re: [Star-hp-l] STAR presentation by Monika Robotkova for
> ICHEP 2022 submitted for review
>
> Hello Monika,
>
> Please find my comments below on your nice poster.
>
> It is advised to follow the guidance set by IUPAC while using symbols
> in
> scientific text:
> https://iupac.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/ICTNS-On-the-use-of-italic-and-roman-fonts-for-symbols-in-scientific-text.pdf
Note:
> [1]
> it should be written as $p$+$p$ and $p$+Au, etc, which is different
> from
> the guidance.
>
> For example:
> pT,jet -> $p_{\rm T,jet}$ (here p represents momentum and it has value
>
> so is italic; whereas "T,jet" is a label and no value so "roman")
> Similarly please correct for z_g -> $z_{\rm g}$ and R_g -> $R_{\rm g}$
> Detailed can be found in the above link.
>
> In Abstract:
> "…(Rg) and the QCD splitting…" -> "…(Rg), and the QCD
> splitting…"
> "…second and third splits…" -> …second, and third splits…"
>
> In Motivation:
> _ Please make sure there is no extra space between words; may be due
> to
> alignment.
> _"…experimentally robust observables" -> "… robust observables."
> (Observables are measured experimentally)
> _ "Two ways how to study the parton shower: " - > "Two ways to study
> the
> parton shower:"
>
> In SoftDrop:
> _Please use two bullets for "Grooming…" and "Connects…"
> _Define  z_cut, pT,1,2, theta and beta
> _Introduce and define R_g here
>
> Correlation between observes at the first split:
> _Please use bullets for each items
> _Define pT,jet
>
> First, second, and third split:
> _You need to introduce or show a cartoon to explain what are these
> First, second, and third splits are
> _Please use bullets for each items
>
> Conclusion:
> _Please use bullets for each items
> _"Selecting on the split number as we move along the jet shower mimics
>
> the same observation selecting on Rg at the first split"
> -> can you please paraphrase this sentence? Not clear.
>
> Regards,
> Nihar
>
> On 2022-06-22 17:41, webmaster--- via Star-hp-l wrote:
>> Dear Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
>>
>> Monika Robotkova (robotmon AT fjfi.cvut.cz) has submitted a material
> for a
>> review, please have a look:
>> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/60023
>>
>> ---
>> 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
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1]
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://iupac.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/ICTNS-On-the-use-of-italic-and-roman-fonts-for-symbols-in-scientific-text.pdf**BNote:__;4oCo!!P4SdNyxKAPE!E6XHTOvnjgfmssRD2an0mn_QxQryCZim81MO2lXzRRIZlPbxcwKQVe_5UJdR6h610ijDm8qQUGxQY4skm0Ve2HrDUXUx$
_______________________________________________
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 Affiliate

Nuclear Science Division
Lawrence Berkeley National Lab
MS70R0319, One Cyclotron Road

Berkeley, CA 94720

Ph: 510-495-2473

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