STAR HardProbes PWG

[Barbara Trzeciak <barbara.trzeciak AT gmail.com>]

Hi Priyanka,

nice poster, my comments are below.

- General comment: try to use bullets rather than plain text.

- Abstract: you can shorten it and don't repeat information that you have on the poster. You don't need to repeat here the abstract that was submitted to the conference, in this way you will have more space to present your analysis. 

- II Methodology: 

   - This section looks a bit squeezed, but you should have more space once you make the abstract shorter.

   - Event mixing technique was applied to calculate k* for uncorrelated pairs -> Event mixing technique to calculate k* for uncorrelated pairs (you don't show it)

   - "K * was calculated for D0" - you don't show k* distributions on the poster, I would remove it. 

- III Experiment: 

   - The STAR scheme is very small, I would remove it if you cannot find more space. If not removed, use a newer version and mark only the relevant detectors. 

   - "STAR was created focusing on the study of Quark .. " - you don't need this sentence

   - You show TOF and TPC PID plots, but don't comment on how the PID information is used. 

   - You can name the section e.g. "D meson reconstruction" and focus on this more

   - You don't need values of the topological cuts. Make the D-meson decay figure bigger and rather explain what are the topological variables that are used to select D-meson candidates 

   - "HFT is the latest addition in the STAR detector system." - it's not the latest and it's already removed. I would remove this sentence. 

- IV. Analysis & Outcomes

   - The inv. mass plots are too small. Choose max. 2 of the plots and increase the size of the text -  axis, units, legends. Leave only the relevant information, e.g. you don't need "Kpi M_inv distribution" on the top.

   - "Invariant mass used for D0 signal ..." - you don't need this, you don't present results.

   - Distance between hits of two tracks (δr(i)) were calculated from reconstructed helix -> δr(i) - distance between hits of two tracks. And move it below δr(i) < mean TPC ...

   - Pair of tracks with fraction of merging > 5% were removed -> Merged tracks: pair of tracks with fraction of merging > 5%

   - We will check the effect with variation of this cut. -> Variation of the cut -> systematic uncertainty

   - Fig. 7: move the caption under the figure.

   - Fig. 8: it's too small, you may consider moving it together with this paragraph somewhere closer to the motivation part. And in the caption or description add for what type of particle pairs this shape is. I would just write" "Expected shape from .... effects. QGP and hadronic phase effects are not known."

   - "Calculation of C(k* ) is ongoing." - move it to the summary or move before "How the correlation

- Summary:

   - This is the first ever experimental analysis of D0 -hadron femtoscopy in Au+Au at STAR -> First experimental analysis of D0-hadron femtoscopy in Au+Au collisions at STAR ongoing

   - "Theoretical or simulation ... " - move to a new line

Cheers,

Barbara

On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 2:11 PM webmaster--- via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Dear Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,

Priyanka Roy Chowdhury (priyanka.roy_chowdhury.dokt AT pw.edu.pl) has submitted 
a material for a review, please have a look:
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/63021

Deadline: 2023-03-26
---
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