STAR HardProbes PWG

[Youqi Song <youqi.song AT yale.edu>]

Hi all,

I have updated my slides here: https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/dis_032823_v4.pdf.

Addressing Nihar's comments:

Slide4:
You don't describe what is (z_cut,2 , beta_2). Please mention what is
that.
if you don't use, mention it.

It's a good point that I should make both sets of (z_cut, beta) values clear. I've updated my figures in the later slides to include (z_cut,1, beta_1) = (0,0) and (z_cut,2, beta_2) = (0.1,0). I will upload these figures to drupal shortly. But as for slide 4, I am inclined to not put in (z_cut,2, beta_2) = (0.1, 0) here, since this bullet point here says "special case". What's "special" about this case is that (z_cut1, beta_1) = (0,0), which I have written on the slide, but the exact values of (z_cut,2, beta_2) don't make it "special".

SLide:6
"Note: Hadronization effects smear the distribution but don’t affect the
correlations (see backup)"

Please either put some plots here to show what you claim or remove it
and in case someone asks you go to your backup slide.
In your talk while presenting, no one will go to see your backup.

I have discussed this with Helen, and we think it will be useful to have a note somewhere in the main slides to acknowledge that we have studied the effect of hadronization. Since the talk is already on the long side, I think it might be better to keep the plots in the backup. In case someone asks me to go to backup slides during Q&A or coffee breaks, I would happily do so.

  "consistent with angular ordered parton shower picture"
Do you mean all subsequent emissions from hard parton in vacuum as a
function of formation time?

 

I have now moved this statement up to combine with the first bullet point, since we have agreed in the "Re: Text for Youqi's slide for HP Plenary" email thread that in the HP highlight talk that the physics message is "Anti-correlation of collinear dropped jet mass and Rg confirms angular ordering in vacuum showers” 

Best,

Youqi

On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 9:08 AM Yi Yang <yiyang AT ncku.edu.tw> wrote:

Hi Helen,

Thanks a lot for the explanation. 

I completely confused myself... it is completely fine to me if HERWIG is running at 200 GeV. 

Chees,

Yi

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yi Yang, Professor
Department of Physics / 

Director of Science Education Center

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 Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 5:58 PM Helen Caines <helen.caines AT yale.edu> wrote:

Hi Yi, Barbara,

  Youqi can correct me if I am wrong, but the HERWIG simulation is run at 200 GeV is it just that the tune was done to LHC data. 

So the physics evolution with sqrt(s) should be there and the comparison valid. Also, since this is a substructure variable if they have the quark/gluon fraction changing appropriately with sqrt(s) the agreement should be good if they are modeling this well at LHC energies. Once the hard scatter has occurred, and assuming the UE isn’t contaminating the results horribly, how the parton splits and then hadronizes should be independent of the original sqrt(s) of the collision for a fixed jet pT and parton species.

Helen

***********************

Yale University
Physics Dept. - Wright Lab.
PO Box 208120
New Haven, CT 06520
203-432-5831
***********************
she/her/hers
"Life is not about waiting for the storms to pass.
It's about learning how to dance in the rain." - Vivian Greene

On Mar 23, 2023, at 4:16 PM, Youqi Song via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi all,

Thanks for the additional feedback! I have implemented all the suggestions and  uploaded my slides here: https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/dis_032823_v3_print.pdf. Regarding the HERWIG comparisons, I think we are only making a weak statement by claiming that "they are roughly consistent with the trend of data", so we aren't drawing too much physics out of the comparisons. But I will discuss that more with Helen and Raghav on that and update you about it.

Please let me know if you have any additional comments and questions!

Best,

Youqi

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 5:44 AM Yi Yang <yiyang AT ncku.edu.tw> wrote:

Hi Youqi,

Thanks a lot for the updated version and reply. I don't have any further comments on your nice slides. 

Just want to follow up the HERWIG7, I understand it has different hadronization and it is (probably) okay to compare it with. But can you really draw a conclusion from this comparison? I mean, can you tell the difference is due to different collision energy or hadronization process? If not, I am not sure how helpful this comparison can be. Just my two cents. 

Cheers,

Yi

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yi Yang, Professor
Department of Physics / 

Director of Science Education Center

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 Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 9:59 PM Youqi Song <youqi.song AT yale.edu> wrote:

Hi Barbara, Nihar and Yi,

Thanks for the feedback! I have updated my slides here: https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/dis_032823_v3.pdf

Regarding Barbara's comments:

Just a comment on s16. It's hard to quickly judge by eye which distribution is more steep so it might not be obvious to people. But you don't need the right plot to make this point. The first split should be basically the sum of the contributions that you show on your plot. So naturally it should be less steep than the blue, if green and yellow are flatter. With the z_g in R_g bins we show that we saw the np contributions to the first split and have a consistent picture - as you write in your backup. Which I think is a nice physics message. 

I see, that's a good point. I switched the zg vs Rg plot into the main section and zg vs # splitting to backup. 

Regarding Nihar's comments:

I have fixed the wording and updated my figures here: https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/youqi/Multidimensional-jet-substructure-multifold-preliminary-figures.

Regarding Yi's comments:

 - p2: your right-handed cartoon plot covers the text a bit. 

 - p3: the resolution at the left-bottom area (z_g, z_cut, and beta) is not good? And similar for dM/M and M on p4. 

I fixed these in the new version.

 

 - p6: What does "~" mean here? I saw 3 places. 

 I use "~" to indicate something like "roughly implies/looks like". We wanted to be careful here because hadronization effects can affect our measurements. I added a note about that on this slide.

 - p12: Could you please remind me of the motivation for comparing HERWIG with LHC tune? Do we expect the tune works for RHIC? 

We don't have a HERWIG tune at RHIC energy, and this LHC tune that we used is the default tune in HERWIG7. I think it's still useful to compare since it does hadronization differently from PYTHIA.

 

 - p14: the "boxes (yellow, green, and black)" cover the information on the plot, could you please try a thinner line for them? 

I have my slides in animation, so when the left side 2D plot first shows up, those boxes are not there. I will keep them for my presentation, but perhaps when I upload the slides to the indico page I can remove those boxes.

Best,

Youqi

On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 8:36 AM Yi Yang via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi Youqi,

Thanks a lot for the nice slides. I only have some minor comments for your consideration. 

 - p2: your right-handed cartoon plot covers the text a bit. 

 - p3: the resolution at the left-bottom area (z_g, z_cut, and beta) is not good? And similar for dM/M and M on p4. 

 - p6: What does "~" mean here? I saw 3 places. 

 - p12: Could you please remind me of the motivation for comparing HERWIG with LHC tune? Do we expect the tune works for RHIC? 

 - p14: the "boxes (yellow, green, and black)" cover the information on the plot, could you please try a thinner line for them? 

 - p15: I am not sure if it is good to say "See Monika's talk at HP", probably is okay...

Cheers,

Yi

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yi Yang, Professor
Department of Physics / 

Director of Science Education Center

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 Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 10:14 AM webmaster--- via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

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

Youqi Song (youqi.song AT yale.edu) has submitted a material for a review, 
please have a look:
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/62961

Deadline: 2023-03-27
---
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

_______________________________________________
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