STAR HardProbes PWG

[Veronica Verkest <vverkest AT gmail.com>]

Greetings from La Thuile! This email has 3 parts: one for Barb, one for Yi, and one in general about the PHENIX RdAu plot.

Barb--

Thanks so much for the feedback! I will follow up on all of your items soon, I just want to clarify a few comments really quickly please:

- s1: add the data

I think I'm just confused... do you mean I should change it to say "Heavy flavor and high-pT results from STAR data"? If so, I can do it on the title slide, but the program is finalized and there are paper versions out, so I cannot change it absolutely everywhere, but that shouldn't be an issue.

-s14: If you don't plan to discuss the comparison to LHC, I suggest to use the version of the figure without the LHC data points

Certainly--I do not need the open grey points since I am mostly concerned with the STAR results. I could not yet find this figure without those points, but perhaps you could please point me to it or to someone who would know where it is?

Per coincidence, I received Barb's email just as I was about to send this:

I have made changes according to Yi's comments, as well as some minor/mostly cosmetic changes suggested by Dave and Joern. They are uploaded to Drupal now.
I would like to address one of Yi's comments:

  - p6: PYTHIA8 over-predicts --> PYTHIA8 underpredicts 

>> I consulted several talks in my preparation of this one, and I saw some differently worded conclusions on this plot. Certainly, Pythia does indeed underpredict the overall x-sec, however I say that, when this is adjusted for the scale (about a factor of 2), it overpredicts events with jets relative to events without jets. I know that this message is clear when I deliver my talk, but the slides should be able to hold-up on their own, so if you or others have suggestions for clearer wording (or even emphasizing specific text) they are certainly welcome.

So, the slides on Drupal were updated right before Barb's suggestions, and I will follow up again once I have implemented hers.

Concerning the PHENIX plot on slide 7, I realize that this is an older result from PHENIX. To the best of my knowledge, there is not a centrality-dependent Rp(d)+Au from STAR. LHC also has plots showing modification as a function of centrality (these tend to be a bit more kinematically complex in the axes/legends), but I feel it is better to show a RHIC figure. I personally feel that this figure is a good visual aid to describe the general history of "unexpected jet modification in small systems" and our motivation to look more differentially, etc., so I feel fully comfortable leaving it in. However, if we decide that this seems out of place, I can remove it and perhaps add some sort of "cartoon" representing what other experiments have seen, but this still requires some non-STAR reference. Please let me know what you think.

Thanks,

Veronica

On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 2:39 PM Barbara Trzeciak via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi Veronica,

very nice overview slides. 

Please see below my comments/suggestions.

Cheers,

Barbara

- s1: add the data
- s2: Jets (light flavor): -> Jets:
- s3:
Increase the pictures and the text size in the boxes.
You don't need the p+p collision sketch in the title of this slide.
- s4:
the slide number is not visible
text on the left is very busy and small - you can have the eta and phi coverage in one line.
I would propose the following order: BBC,  TPC, BEMC, TOF, HFT. MTD
Scintillator detector -> Triggering
- s5: Rg = ΔR(1,2) -> define on the picture "1" and "2"
- s5 (2)
You have 2 slides 5.
There is not much jet pT dependence, and you also don't comment on this.
I suggest to have the zg and Rg distribution only for one of the jet pT bins and make the plots bigger.
- s6:
Different J/ψ production -> Dependence of the J/ψ production mechanism on the Jet Activity (jet multiplicity per event) - and I would move it as the first motivation bullet.
color singlet and color-octet models -> Color Single Model and NRQCD
- s7: You already introduced why we need p+A, this is also not so recent study anymore (and from PHENIX) - I would therefore suggest to remove this slide from an overview talk. You can add a related bullet on slide 8.
- s8: expand the EA and UE abbreviations
- s10:
 with unity above 2GeV/c ->  with unity above 3GeV/c (conclusion from the paper)
"Therefore, no CNM observed in J/ψ in small systems within systematics" - Little CNM effects observed for high pT J/ψ in small systems.
And you can add: Suppression in central Au+Au collisions mostly due hot medium effects.
-s11:  in J/ψ ->  for J/ψ at high pT
-s12: Add definition of R_CP
-s13:
D0 jets -> D^0 jets
Significant D0 -> Significant D^0
at low p_T -> at low p_T,jet
Define the jet radial profile (and/or add a cartoon, you can check Diptanil's slides)
Jet radial profiles consistent between central and mid-central events -> Jet radial profiles for D^0 p_T > 5 GeV/c consistent with unity
-s14:
If you don't plan to discuss the comparison to LHC, I suggest to use the version of the figure without the LHC data points
Add a first bullet: Isobar collisions - medium size collision system
Then use bullets for the rest.
with Au+Au ... -> with Au+Au collisions comparable Npart -> comparable <Npart>
Similar densities -> similar E-loss (for quarkonia it's more dissociation and regeneration effects that play role in HI). I suggest: Suppression driven by the system size <N_part>
-s15:
for Au+Au as well -> measured for Au+Au as well
Define θSJ
-s15-15(2): Add "HardCore jets" and "Matched jets" above the figures
And you have two 15 slides
-s17:
No significant CNM effects in J/ψ -> No signicant CNM effects for high-p_T J/ψ
at similar density ->  at similar system size <N_part>
- I would also suggest to add some of the new HP results if you have time (~2 slides). E.g - you have already jet-substructure studies, I would propose to add Andrew's EEC results. And for HI I would propose to add jet v2 from Tristan or/and Gabe's results. 

On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 7:49 PM Yi Yang via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Dear Veronica,

Thank you so much for the nice summary presentation. I only have some minor comments on it.

  - p2: Title: Probing the quark-gluon plasma --> Probing the Quark-Gluon Plasma (make Q, G, and P in bold since I don't find a good place to introduce "QGP" in this slide) 

  - p2: More excited -- Higher excited 

  - p6: PYTHIA8 over-predicts --> PYTHIA8 underpredicts 

  - p7: Do we have a similar result from STAR? Would it be good to use our own result? 

  - p10: no CNM observed in J/ψ in small systems within systematics --> no CNM observed in J/ψ in small systems within systematics at high pT

            (At low pT (< 2 GeV/c), the CNM effect is significant) 

  - p11: Similar comment on CNM from J/psi. 

  - p16: no comment, just like the Galileo thermometer... 

  - p17: Similar comment on CNM from J/psi.  

            It would be great to mention Upsilon in the summary slide (since it is the most recent PRL result). 

 

Cheers,

Yi

On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 8:35 PM webmaster--- via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

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

Veronica Verkest (vverkest AT gmail.com) has submitted a material for a review, 
please have a look:
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/63056

Deadline: 2023-03-25
---
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