STAR HardProbes PWG

[Veronica Verkest <vverkest AT gmail.com>]

Hi Nihar,

I can address some of these questions and Dave can comment/supplement and answer those which I cannot.

1) SLide#6:
_ What is Y-axis "ZDCX-bin data"? how do you calculate efficiency value
from data? (Not clear)

_ are these efficiency values are pT- and eta- integrated one?

These efficiency values are integrated over pT and eta. This plot might be more visually intuitive if you ignore the 7th bin on the x-axis, as this is just the average of the bins to the left. There is a typical pT-dependence shape in the curves and some slight dependence on eta (the asymmetry of the UE means different populations and therefore different efficiency for different eta-ranges in the TPC). The data-ZDCx bins were clear to me (first seeing the plot) as it is directly from the detector, but I had to reconcile to myself that, in doing the embedding, we do get a different ZDCx. The significance here is that the efficiency curves do not vary significantly as a function of the embedding ZDCx. This shows us that all tracks (real and PU) can be efficiency-corrected the same way, as the embedding ZDCx does not discriminate.

2) SLide#7:
_What is this fit parameter for rho_PU? can you show some plot where do
you have this fitting?

 rho_PU is dN_chg/dEtadPhi. To investivage PU, Dave's code looks at efficiency-corrected charged track mult in data vs embedding as a function of ZDCx. After effic correction, the mult increases as a function of ZDCx. We fit this linearly then extrapolate to zero ZDCx to see the mult we expect at zero-pileup (and this has a systematic). The fit is just a linear fit of the TE-corrected chg mult.

_Are these from "ZDCX-bin embed" or "ZDCX_bin data"?

ZDCx_bin data, as we wish to correct according to the data ZDCx (the previous check was just to ensure that the UE and PU face the same efficiency in the detector).

 

3) What eta range has been used for Slide#9-13 results? And how do you
apply eta-dependence efficiency on them? A bit more elaboration is
required to understand the correction procedure?

This question of eta range is a good insight; when we measure UE (aka charged mult), we measure in the "UE region", which is defined as the area azimuthally perpendicular to the jet/trigger axis in triggered events, but in MB events I am quite sure Dave takes total chg mult in the TPC (+-1 in eta). I cannot say offhand how he handles this algorithmically (e.g. removing 1 or 2 top jets?)

 

4) As we discussed, please separate out correlated and uncorrelated sys
uncertainty. especially for slide-13-14 results.

Thank you--we will work to make this more apparent.

 

5)Slide17- I think we need to correct the y-axis (although Delta phi
correction is negligible but still we need what is that contribution
is). In this paper, all other results are corrected for detector effect
and presented with sys. uncertainty expect this Delta_phi result. It
sounds sloppy.
Same for Slide-19 Aj results.

I have considered this much myself. I do not think that the physics is lost here by not correcting--if anything, I feel that correcting this could make the plot less insightful. EA here is measured by the BBC, as we know p+A is not simple for centrality. As we investigate potential hard and soft correlations, I believe that discussing observables with respect to the minimum hardness of the jet (at a detector level) is very helpful to complement the other plots--especially the semi-inclusive jet measurement. Additionally, although not shown today since it is still under progress, the UE mult distribution as a function of leading jet pT will not be fully corrected for tracking efficiency. We have been considering working all these observables together, and it seems to make the most sense to present Aj and deltaPhi as per-dijet quantities rather than per-trigger.

Thanks so much to you and all for the attention and feedback today!

Veronica

On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 11:51 PM Nihar Sahoo via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi David,

  Please find my follow up comment and questions.

1) SLide#6:
_ What is Y-axis "ZDCX-bin data"? how do you calculate efficiency value
from data? (Not clear)
_ are these efficiency values are pT- and eta- integrated one?

2) SLide#7:

_What is this fit parameter for rho_PU? can you show some plot where do
you have this fitting?
_Are these from "ZDCX-bin embed" or "ZDCX_bin data"?

3) What eta range has been used for Slide#9-13 results? And how do you
apply eta-dependence efficiency on them? A bit more elaboration is
required to understand the correction procedure?

4) As we discussed, please separate out correlated and uncorrelated sys
uncertainty. especially for slide-13-14 results.

5)Slide17- I think we need to correct the y-axis (although Delta phi
correction is negligible but still we need what is that contribution
is). In this paper, all other results are corrected for detector effect
and presented with sys. uncertainty expect this Delta_phi result. It
sounds sloppy.

Same for Slide-19 Aj results.


Cheers
Nihar



On 2023-01-19 20:19, David Stewart via Star-hp-l wrote:
> Hi all,
> Please find attached ours slides for tomorrow's (now this morning --
> sorry, message didn't send!) meeting,
> Best regards,
> Dave
>
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 11:42 AM Roy Chowdhury Priyanka (DOKT) via
> Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I would like to present an update on D0-hadron femtoscopic
>> correlation function analysis at Au+Au@200 GeV.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Priyanka
>>
>> -------------------------
>>
>> From: Star-hp-l <star-hp-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov> on behalf of
>> Barbara Trzeciak via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2023 10:58 AM
>> To: STAR HardProbes PWG <Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
>> Subject: [Star-hp-l] HP-pwg meeting Thursday (19th Jan) 10 AM, BNL
>> time
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> We will have our HP-pwg meeting this Thursday (19th Jan) at 10 AM
>> EDT.
>> Please let us know if you want to present and discuss your analysis.
>>
>> HP working group weekly meeting info:
>>
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/pwg/Hard-Probes/Weekly-HP-PWG-meeting
>>
>> Join ZoomGov Meeting
>>
> https://bnl.zoomgov.com/j/1611419615?pwd=VW1hNm43ZDd5d2EvK2R4aEJsQ2ZNZz09
>> [1]
>>
>> Meeting ID: 161 141 9615
>> Passcode: 744968
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Barbara, Nihar, Yi
>> _______________________________________________
>> Star-hp-l mailing list
>> Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
>> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l
>
> --
>
> David Stewart
> Postdoctoral Fellow | Department of Physics, Wayne State University
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1]
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://bnl.zoomgov.com/j/1611419615?pwd=VW1hNm43ZDd5d2EvK2R4aEJsQ2ZNZz09__;!!P4SdNyxKAPE!GemY2AEP-2QpMsboftk7lCorhPNeS8pHqm5PPZOW8Em7PkTZZj02jbbKS5lAo79-1QmPlBwTuE1Elsi5hbNWLI0HLUM9vnnPAQ$
> _______________________________________________
> 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