STAR HardProbes PWG

[Yi Yang <yiyang AT ncku.edu.tw>]

Hi all,

I pushed Andrew's slides to the STAR talk, please comment there.

Cheers,

Yi

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yi Yang, Associate Professor
Department of Physics
National Cheng Kung University
Tainan, 701 Taiwan
E-Mail: yiyang AT ncku.edu.tw
Tel: +886-6-2757575 ext.65237
Fax: +886-6-2747995
Group Web: http://phys.ncku.edu.tw/~yiyang
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

On Sat, Oct 22, 2022 at 4:01 PM Nihar Sahoo via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi Andrew,

For a record, I sign off.

Cheers
Nihar

On 2022-10-21 12:24, Yi Yang via Star-hp-l wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Thanks a lot for the explanation and updated version. I don't have any
> further comments/suggestions on your nice presentation.
>
> Cheers,
> Yi
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Yi Yang, Associate Professor
> Department of Physics
> National Cheng Kung University
> Tainan, 701 Taiwan
> E-Mail: yiyang AT ncku.edu.tw
> Tel: +886-6-2757575 ext.65237
> Fax: +886-6-2747995
> Group Web: http://phys.ncku.edu.tw/~yiyang [1]
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 4:00 AM Andrew Tamis <andrew.tamis AT yale.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Yi,
>>
>> p5: Ah, this was a mistake, i meant to replace it with pT_Jet as I
>> did in slide 6, it is fixed now, thank you for pointing that out!
>>
>> The three regions are distinguished by the trend of the slope of
>> each, free hadrons with a constant positive slope in log scale, then
>> the transition region when that slope starts decreasing and ending
>> at the highest point.  Then the quark/gluon region is an almost flat
>> region with a small negative slope and ends when the slope gets
>> steeper.  In the future I could be more rigorous to get values of
>> the beginning and ending of each region by curve fitting, but I want
>> to demonstrate in this talk that you can read off the general
>> behavior by eye.
>>
>> Best,
>> Andrew
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 2:25 PM Yi Yang <yiyang0429 AT gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> Thanks a lot for the nice slides. I only have a few
>> comments/suggestions on v3 for your consideration.
>> - p5: could you please indicate what Q is in the formula?
>> - p7 or p8 (p9: just for my own education, how do you determine
>> the "Free Hadron", "Transition", and "Quarks/Gluons" regions? You
>> mentioned in p7 "Each region is determined by its scaling behavior,
>> could you please tell me more about this? Thanks.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Yi
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 2:00 PM Nihar Sahoo via Star-hp-l
>> <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>> Hello Tamis,
>>
>> Thank you for addressing my comments.
>> I have a few additional comments after going through your motivation
>> and
>> Pythia study again.
>>
>> SLide3 (also 4-7): Although you have shown what is "Delta R" in the
>> cartoon, but can you please define or mention what is "Delta R"?
>> As you mention the relation with formation time, a clear definition
>> is
>> missing.
>>
>> Slide7: Can you mention what is "R_L" in x-axis? Is that as
>> "ln(Delta_R)"?
>>
>> Slide8: How do you distinguish (or set the ranges along x-axis)
>> green-free hadron, gray-transition, and blue-parton region in
>> PYTHIA6? I
>> don't know how it has been done in theory (right side plot)? A
>> guidance
>> will be helpful. It brings a question for SLide10.
>>
>> Slide10: can you set those gree/gray/blue regions for different jet
>> pT
>> to see how much those regions shift as a function of jet pT?
>> Visually,
>> there is a change in shape. But can we say something which region is
>>
>> shifting to where and how much that shift is (in Pythia)?
>>
>> Cheers
>> Nihar
>>
>> On 2022-10-20 11:55, Andrew Tamis via Star-hp-l wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> Thank you for the comments!
>>>
>>> I have decided to remove the detector level data, leaving the
>>> comparison between PYTHIA and Geant.  Showing that these agree
>>> relatively well will give justification that the needed unfolding
>>> effects will be small, and because of this data won't be shown
>> until
>>> unfolding is completed.
>>>
>>> In addition I have addressed comments given here
>>>
>>> Nihar's Comments
>>>
>>> "_Before SLide14, you could introduce STAR detector system and
>> what
>>> are
>>> the detectors you plan to use for your measurement? A short intro
>> is
>>> sufficient."
>>>
>>> I will verbally introduce STAR and the TPC, but as i am now no
>> longer
>>> showing data, is introduction of the specific detectors still
>> needed?
>>> please let me know.
>>>
>>> Slide 14 and 15 have been removed/changed
>>>
>>> Slide16:
>>> _Interesting behavior in response to pT cuts -> PYTHIA6
>> simulation:
>>> EEC
>>> shows a dependence on jet p_{T}
>>> _Robust to pT-independent tracking efficiency effects -> should we
>> say
>>> this a "robust" or "mild" "negligible" pT-dependent ?
>>> We have not checked yet with pT-dependent tracking efficiency.
>>> (Slide13)
>>> _ last two bullets "Detector-Level measurement done in STAR p+p
>> run 12
>>>
>>> and Unfolding in progress " I would just say combining "First
>>> measurement of ECC in pp sqrt(s)=200 GeV is in progress in STAR"
>>>
>>> Done.
>>>
>>> Barbara's comments
>>>
>>> _- s5,6: increase text size of the bullet points._
>>> _- s8-9: label the left plots Pythia and add the version. I would
>> also
>>> suggest adding on the top of the plots a bigger label with the jet
>> pT
>>> information. Right now it's hidden in the "Parameters", so it
>> might
>>> not be so obvious to everyone that moving to STAR energy means
>>> lowering the jet pT range. _
>>>
>>> Done.
>>>
>>> I have uploaded the updated draft, please let me know if you have
>> any
>>> additional comments
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Andrew
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 1:09 AM Sooraj Radhakrishnan via Star-hp-l
>>> <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Barbara, Andrew,
>>>> //s15: to address Sooraj's concerns, which I also share, I would
>>>> propose to remove "PYTHIA 6" and "GEANT" points and leave the raw
>>>> detector level data distributions. What do you think?//
>>>>
>>>> Yes, this would also be an option. It is up to Andrew to decide
>>>> which progress and message he wants to show
>>>>
>>>> thanks
>>>> Sooraj
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 11:40 PM Barbara Trzeciak
>>>> <barbara.trzeciak AT gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Andrew,
>>>>
>>>> nice slides, please see my comments below.
>>>>
>>>> - s5,6: increase text size of the bullet points.
>>>> - s8-9: label the left plots Pythia and add the version. I would
>>>> also suggest adding on the top of the plots a bigger label with
>> the
>>>> jet pT information. Right now it's hidden in the "Parameters", so
>> it
>>>> might not be so obvious to everyone that moving to STAR energy
>> means
>>>> lowering the jet pT range.
>>>> - s14: pp Run12 -> add energy and centrality
>>>> - s15: to address Sooraj's concerns, which I also share, I would
>>>> propose to remove "PYTHIA 6" and "GEANT" points and leave the raw
>>>> detector level data distributions. What do you think?
>>>> Sooraj, would that work for you ?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Barbara
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 12:36 PM Sooraj Radhakrishnan via
>> Star-hp-l
>>>> <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Andrew,
>>>> Are you referring to the plots of S9/10 as performance plots?
>>>> From your S15, comparing PYTHIA and GEANT, the detector effects
>> seem
>>>> to be small. So I have a concern that we will be in effect
>> showing
>>>> the data as preliminary results. I believe you are not ready to
>>>> release the results without the systematics and unfolding done.
>> So I
>>>> would suggest not to show data points for the energy correlator,
>>>> rather some other performance plots that would indicate your
>>>> progress and STAR's ability to do the measurements. Let me know
>> what
>>>> you think
>>>>
>>>> thanks
>>>> Sooraj
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 12:29 PM Nihar Sahoo
>>>> <nihar AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov> wrote:
>>>> Hello Tamis,
>>>>
>>>> It is a good study on this new observable.
>>>> AFA Pythia study is concern, I don't have any comments.
>>>> I have some minor comments on your data analysis slides.
>>>>
>>>> _ Before SLide14, you could introduce STAR detector system and
>> what
>>>> are
>>>> the detectors you plan to use for your measurement? A short intro
>> is
>>>>
>>>> sufficient.
>>>>
>>>> Slide14:
>>>> _ pp Run12 -> pp sqrt(s)=200 GeV (year 2012)
>>>> _Trigger - JP2 -> As no one know what is JP2, so it would be good
>> to
>>>>
>>>> mention "Jet patch trigger" (here 2 is not necessary for outside
>>>> world
>>>> as you describe details about this trigger in sub-bullet)
>>>> _ Constituent PT ->  Constituent Transverse momentum, p_{T}
>>>> _Official Embedding, PYTHIA 6  -> PYTHIA6+STAR Géant simulation
>>>>
>>>> Slide15:
>>>> _ Please include "pp sqrt(s) =200 GeV" as legend
>>>> _ Detector level data retains trends in jet momentum selection ->
>>>> Detector level data retains trends in jet p_{T} selection
>>>>
>>>> Slide16:
>>>> _Interesting behavior in response to pT cuts -> PYTHIA6
>> simulation:
>>>> EEC
>>>> shows a dependence on jet p_{T}
>>>> _Robust to pT-independent tracking efficiency effects -> should
>> we
>>>> say
>>>> this a "robust" or "mild" "negligible" pT-dependent ?
>>>> We have not checked yet with pT-dependent tracking efficiency.
>>>> (Slide13)
>>>> _ last two bullets "Detector-Level measurement done in STAR p+p
>> run
>>>> 12
>>>> and Unfolding in progress " I would just say combining "First
>>>> measurement of ECC in pp sqrt(s)=200 GeV is in progress in STAR"
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>> Nihar
>>>>
>>>> On 2022-10-17 23:00, Andrew Tamis via Star-hp-l wrote:
>>>>> Hi Sooraj,
>>>>>
>>>>> I think I would like to show the PYTHIA results and performance
>>>> plots
>>>>> and hold off on a preliminary request until I get farther along
>>>> with
>>>>> unfolding.  Do you mean that I should show the performance plots
>>>> of
>>>>> detector level data without the comparison to PYTHIA/Geant?
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> Andrew
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 8:59 AM Sooraj Radhakrishnan via
>> Star-hp-l
>>>>> <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Andrew,
>>>>>> Thanks for preparing these nice slides. Since you show detector
>>>>>> level and generator level PYTHIA distribution are quite
>> similar,
>>>> I
>>>>>> wonder if the results should be labelled STAR Preliminary, as
>>>> they
>>>>>> can be argued to be close to the physics results. Do you want
>> to
>>>>>> show the data also at DNP or just the PYTHIA results and give
>>>> some
>>>>>> performance plots for data?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> thanks
>>>>>> Sooraj
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 6:27 AM webmaster--- via Star-hp-l
>>>>>> <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> 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/61351
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Deadline: 2022-10-27
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> 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
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/__http://phys.ncku.edu.tw/*yiyang__;fg!!P4SdNyxKAPE!D_6ZXhYWHVY38sr6lcWf-aVltTaKe6qGWzo4nvNqZcIrHLWa7gBkG8U1YKI11-JLIfU6L-bL1bmIwS2m3kYj5PCYXQ$
> _______________________________________________
> 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