STAR HardProbes PWG

[Anders Knospe <ank220 AT lehigh.edu>]

Hi, Brennan. I am sitting down to dinner right now, but if you'll still be available in 30 minutes, I can try to help you on the things you flagged. -AK

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 10:38 PM Brennan Schaefer via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi Barbara, thanks so much.  I just posted an update with most of your comments addressed.  I need guidance on a few of them (in red below).   b

Abstract:

√s =200 = √s = 200 (missing space)   Fixed

 

Motivation:

- 7x increase in luminosity (~700M events) - I guess here you mean HT triggered data ? It's better then to provide the integrated luminosity Fixed

And I'm trying to understand 7x more. For p+p at 200 GeV we had HT0 (HT2) triggers for the published data, with luminosity of 1.36 (23.5) pb−1. You're using HT1 with 80 pb−1 (600M events) and we also have HT2 for 2017 data with 340 pb−1 (450M events).  How did you get your number ? Fixed, better numbers provided by Rongrong

- The Color Octet Model is the currently leading candidate mechanism - I wouldn't fully agree with this. That depends on the pT range. NRQCD (with both color single and color octet) and CEM can reasonably describe cross sections.   Replaced

 

I would just state that we have different models on the market: Color SIngle Model, (CGC+) Non-Relativistic Quantum Chromodynamics and (Improved) Color Evaporation model

Or replace this bullet explaining why production vs multiplicity: constrain model calculations + interplay of soft and hard processes

Replaced with generic “Study of Jpsi production vs. event activity explores correlation between hard and soft processes”

 

- vs. event multiplicity -> vs charged-particle multiplicity Fixed

 

The STAR Experiment:

- Electromagnetic Calorimeter -> Barrel Electromagnetic Calorimeter (also BEMC on the STAR picture) Fixed

- Why do you specifically mention geometric coverage in eta and phi for TOF, not for the other detectors as well ?  Fixed, removed (self evident from diagram)

 

Event Selection:

- Add the trigger threshold in E_T Help Needed

Particle ID Cuts:

- Define nSigma_e Help Needed

 

Signal Extraction:

- Enlarge font of the inv. mass plot . Fixed Remove "Mult: 7-8" Fixed

- The equations are too small, you can reduce them. Fixed, enlarged

- unlike-sign pairs -> unlike-sign e^+e- pairs (same for like sign) Fixed

 

Cheers,

Barbara

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 5:24 PM Barbara Trzeciak via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi Brennan,

nice poster. Below are my comments.

Abstract:

√s =200 = √s = 200 (missing space)

Motivation:

- 7x increase in luminosity (~700M events) - I guess here you mean HT triggered data ? It's better then to provide the integrated luminosity 

And I'm trying to understand 7x more. For p+p at 200 GeV we had HT0 (HT2) triggers for the published data, with luminosity of 1.36 (23.5) pb−1. You're using HT1 with 80 pb−1 (600M events) and we also have HT2 for 2017 data with 340 pb−1 (450M events).  How did you get your number ? 

- The Color Octet Model is the currently leading candidate mechanism - I wouldn't fully agree with this. That depends on the pT range. NRQCD (with both color single and color octet) and CEM can reasonably describe cross sections. 

I would just state that we have different models on the market: Color SIngle Model, (CGC+) Non-Relativistic Quantum Chromodynamics and (Improved) Color Evaporation model

Or replace this bullet explaining why production vs multiplicity: constrain model calculations + interplay of soft and hard processes

- vs. event multiplicity -> vs charged-particle multiplicity

The STAR Experiment:

- Electromagnetic Calorimeter -> Barrel Electromagnetic Calorimeter (also BEMC on the STAR picture)

- Why do you specifically mention geometric coverage in eta and phi for TOF, not for the other detectors as well ?

Event Selection:

- Add the trigger threshold in E_T

Particle ID Cuts:

- Define nSigma_e

Signal Extraction:

- Enlarge font of the inv. mass plot . Remove "Mult: 7-8"

- The equations are too small, you can reduce them. 

- unlike-sign pairs -> unlike-sign e^+e- pairs (same for like sign)

Cheers,

Barbara

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 2:16 PM webmaster--- via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

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

Brennan Schaefer (brennanschaefer AT hotmail.com) has submitted a material for a 
review, please have a look:
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/63064

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

_______________________________________________
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