STAR HardProbes PWG

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

Hello Nihar

Thanks for your nice comments. A new version has been uploaded to Drupal. 

Please see my replies inline:

On Jul 2, 2022, at 1:17 AM, Nihar Sahoo via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hello Rongrong,

Thanks for sharing your nice HP talk.
Please find my comment and question below.


Slide#6: "high-pT leading particle "  -> "high-pT constituent particle"

I changed to "high-pT leading constituent". I think it is important to point out that the requirement is only for the leading particle, otherwise, people might think we make such requirement for all the constituents. 

"single hadrons" -> "inclusive charged hadrons"

Done

Slide#7 "spectrum shape" I understand the reason to mention this that jet pT spectra shapes are different for pi0 and gamma.
              But not sure if it is ok to include this with color factor and mean path length dependence.
              "Spectrum shape" is after hadronization.
               You may consider to include another bullet about "Jet pT spectral shapes are different for pi0+jet and gamma+jet"

I added "Different spectrum shapes" as a sub-bullet now. I agree that it is not a motivation as other two points, but rather a consequence we need to deal with. 

"Similar suppression for γ-jet and π0-jet" -> "Similar suppression for γ-jet and π0-jet within uncertainty"

Done

You could also point out  that "for R=0.5, IAA(pt) shape is different than R=0.2"

Done

SLide#8:
"Ratio of cross sections " -> in this context "Ratio of yield as a function of jet pT"  (these are semi-inclusive measurement)

Changed to "Ratio of yields"

Slide#9:
Title "Inter-jet Broadening" -> "γ-jet and π0-jet acoplanarity" or simply "Jet acoplanarity in heavy-ion collisions"

Changed to "Jet acoplanarity"

For this slides, I suggest to include p+p data and Pythia8 comparisons to convince people that both are consistent at 9-11 GeV ET.
(For note: In case someone ask to have same kinematic comparison for pp like 11-15 GeV, you could say that we have done that measurement recently; but not shown here And for pi0+jet they are also consistent within uncertainty; we are working for publication.)

This is a good point. Replaced the left plot with pp figure. 

I moved R = 0.2 results to backup

"Effects of wake?" -> Do we need to point to this physics only here? There are other physics also.

This is one mechanism which seems to be able to explain both R = 0.2 and R = 0.5. I think it would be interesting to discuss a bit about this. I put a question mark there to indicate it is not the only explanation. 

SLide#10
_ Please mention "Delta R" somewhere
_Do we need to mention here the matching criteria?

Do you mean the Delta R between HardCore and Matched jets? I will mention orally that they are matched geometrically

Slide#11
"< AJ > " -> Do you mean average AJ ?

Yes

Another important info from this measurement was "No significant difference between p+p and Au+Au of jet substructure with hardcore selection"
Do you want to point this out?

I am not sure about this. This is what is stated in the paper "We observe a clear dijet imbalance indicating jet quenching effects in Au + Au collisions for all HardCore jets including the wide angle jets." Essentially, we are saying that the shapes are different between p+p and Au+Au for HardCore jets.

Slide#17
"Redistribution of charm quarks in HI collisions?" Not sure but is not that "More production charm quarks in HI collisions?"
         Trying to understand "Redistribution of charm…"

We have done a calculation of the total charm production cross section in Au+Au, which was found to be compatible to p+p. See slide 5 of https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/files/QM2022_poster_slides_Vanek_v09.pdf. So there aren't more charm quarks produced in HI collision, but rather more charm quarks form Lc and Ds, at least in the kinematic region we are measuring, and consequently less for D0 and D+/-. 

Slide#25
"Inter-jet broadening" -> "Jet acoplanarity"

Done

Slide#27:
Just curious: Do you know why we do not have projection of J/psi v1 between pT:9-14 GeV/c  where we have projection for v2 upto pT:14 GeV/c?
Is this just we don't show or any reason?

My guess is that the v1 measurement is much more challenging compared to v2. 

Just a suggestion to include STAR HP kinematic coverage BUR plot for RUn23+25, good to show at the end.

Done. 

Best

Rongrong

Regards
Nihar


On 2022-07-02 01:56, Rongrong Ma via Star-hp-l wrote:

Hello All
This is an invited talk on sPHENIX relevant STAR results and plans at
the Predictions for sPHENIX RBRC Workshop
(https://www.bnl.gov/sphenix2022/index.php). I focus mainly on jets
and HF results. Please send me your comments. Thanks.
Best
Rongrong

On Jul 1, 2022, at 4:22 PM, webmaster--- via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
Dear Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
Rongrong Ma (marr AT bnl.gov) has submitted a material for a review, please have
a look:
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/60153
---
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