STAR HardProbes PWG

[Nihar Sahoo <nihar AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>]

Hello Youqi,

we can discuss on this topic after HP2023.

Enjoy the conference.

Thank you
Nihar

On 2023-03-25 08:53, Yi Yang via Star-hp-l wrote:
> Hi Youqi,
>
> I pushed your nice talk to STAR talk, so Rongrong can send his final
> comment there.
>
> Cheers,
> Yi
>
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 9:18 PM Youqi Song via Star-hp-l
> <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>
> > Hi Rongrong,
> >
> > Thanks for the comments. I have updated my slides here:
> > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/dis_032823_v5.pdf.
> >
> > > s27
> > > - remove (you already have this slide)
> >
> > This slide is different because the bottom right plot is zg vs #
> > splitting. The one I have in the main section is zg vs Rg.
> >
> > Also regarding your comment on HERWIG labels in the other email
> > thread, I am inclined to keep them as they are, since I indeed
> > generated HERWIG events with the default LHC tune, which has
> > different UE parameters than the EE4C tune.
> >
> > Best,
> > Youqi
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 9:13 PM Ma, Rongrong <marr AT bnl.gov> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello Youqi
> > >
> > > In the interest of time, here are some comments for your
> > > consideration.
> > >
> > > General
> > > - For the first letter of the first word after a colon, sometimes
> > > you capitalize it and sometimes you do not. Please pick one and
> > > stick to it.
> > >
> > > s3
> > > - The text and formula below the cartoon on the left are blurring.
> > > I suggest you write it down yourself instead of copy and paste a
> > > screenshot (if I am right)
> > >
> > > s7
> > > - for 200 GeV pp collisions
> > >
> > > s8
> > > - unfolds for -> unfolds
> > > - Uncertainties include prior variation, accounted ->
> > > Uncertainties due to prior choice accounted
> > >
> > > s10
> > > - The figure slightly overlaps with the text below
> > >
> > > s12
> > > - allows us to do algebra on post-unfolded quantities -> allows us
> > > to correlate unfolded quantities
> > >
> > > s16
> > > - It is a bit weird to refer to a HP talk. I suggest to remove the
> > > box on top.
> > >
> > > s18
> > > - are more likely from -> are more likely to have
> > >
> > > s27
> > > - remove (you already have this slide)
> > >
> > > Best
> > > Rongrong
> > >
> > > > On Mar 24, 2023, at 4:34 PM, Youqi Song via Star-hp-l
> > > <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
> > > > Hi Nihar and all,
> > > >
> > > > I have updated my slides here:
> > > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/dis_032823_v4.1.pdf.
> > > I added "(z_cut,2 , beta_2) = (0.1, 0)" on slide 4, and the
> > > statement on slide 14 "consistent with angular ordered parton
> > > showers" is what Helen suggested in the email with Monika. In
> > > addition, I put a slide for comparison with theory calculation in
> > > backup.
> > > > Best,
> > > > Youqi
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 2:01 PM Nihar Sahoo
> > > <nihar AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov> wrote:
> > > > Hi Youqi,
> > > >
> > > > Please find my further comments inline.
> > > >
> > > > On 2023-03-24 20:11, Youqi Song wrote:
> > > > > 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".
> > > >
> > > > Sorry, I don't get my answer.
> > > > Have you used (z_cut,2 , beta_2) in your analysis or not?
> > > > If you have used it, just mention it in this slide.
> > > > If not, don't mention it.
> > > >
> > > > > > 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”
> > > >
> > > > I don't get my answer here.
> > > >
> > > > So I would not say "confirms".
> > > > Because it is not clear what "angular ordering" we are saying
> > > here?
> > > > Thank you
> > > > Nihar
> > > >
> > > > > 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 [1] [1]
> > > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 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 [1] [2]
> > > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 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 [1] [3]
> > > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 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
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Links:
> > > > > ------
> > > > > [1]
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://phys.ncku.edu.tw/*yiyang__;fg!!P4SdNyxKAPE!DuZlwBpp-srqR2MXp0cO5mtDrBhwuukEGTpgv1VroSzk7vXsaSVAzvNM8U-mAyzWPtQDchbQxbc4Bl7kpRDoFcp4fg$
> > > > > [2]
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://phys.ncku.edu.tw/*yiyang__;fg!!P4SdNyxKAPE!AChYtzy_tw7E3MnMW7RPLK8yPvDga79KcbMWxllvElwfhak6DCByocdEw0KN7gmeKdDfH-w3_urz1ylF6kk-mZYQ-Xsp$
> > > > > [3]
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://phys.ncku.edu.tw/*yiyang__;fg!!P4SdNyxKAPE!BZxEkpZevcKXGmG-iJsyYxtIX_A6c0H7PAK4ORLJQuTChPiEzSMT5-3W_yRBEEO0lLYDXPlofhXnJwC-cK6NxAiCfw$
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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!CjgwOEeNgq_tSuoTHuL0g9qhPi42VG1XdwZ3CbCAXpwvBVvMmeq4XALCnnf9WJT2RgJtxIUdj7okA-ftMlH6orfjmJQM$
> _______________________________________________
> Star-hp-l mailing list
> Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l