STAR HardProbes PWG

[Veronica Verkest <vverkest AT gmail.com>]

Hi Barb and Nihar,

I have gone through and implemented most of your changes and uploaded a current version to Drupal. I will address a few comments here:

2 slides for 5, 8, and 15

I realize that these slides have duplicated numbers; this is because these are slides with animations

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. 

I feel like this would look more neat, but then I would need to rearrange the legend/preliminary text, etc.. If we can think of a nice way to do this cosmetically, I am open to suggestions!

- 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. 

I am looking into these results in the time I have available. I will follow up after looking into restructuring. 

SLide12:
"Energy loss at LHC is larger than at RHIC" How do you conclude this
statement ?

I have created a backup slide 20 with a visual and written explanation of this conclusion, please let me know if it is clear. 

  Slide13:
I would not encourage you to show these D^0 jet results because Diptanil
showed at last collaboration meeting that our results have been changed
due to some track selection cut.

After your follow-up email, I am not sure if you think I should keep or drop the D0 jet results. If I add in other new results and the talk becomes too long, I suppose this would be one of the less priority measurements. 

Thank you,

Veronica

On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 6:18 PM Veronica Verkest <vverkest AT gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Barbara,

I appreciate you sending me a nice clean PDF link (I was only able to find it within slides). Also, you are correct--because of my schedule, I have not yet implemented all of your or Nihar's changes & updated on Drupal. I have implemented most of your changes on my local copy, but I will likely send a new update tonight along with a list of the comments I am still addressing, since adding/changing content takes longer than revising slides.

Thanks,

Veronica

On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 5:56 PM Barbara Trzeciak via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi Veronica,

You can find a different version of the plot from slide 14 here:

https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/Raa_Npart.pdf

Also, could you please go again via the comments, I see that some are still to be addressed. 

Cheers,

Barbara

On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:34 PM Nihar Sahoo via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hello Veronica,

On my this comment,
> Slide13:
> I would not encourage you to show these D^0 jet results because
> Diptanil showed at last collaboration >meeting that our results have
> been changed due to some track selection cut.
> I understand these are "STAR preliminary" but we now know that results
> have been changed.

I think we can still show these results outside though there is no
significant change in physics message.
And we will discuss on this topic in future hp-pwg meeting once Diptanil
updates us his detailed study in this direction.

Thank you
Nihar


On 2023-03-26 20:27, Nihar Sahoo via Star-hp-l wrote:
> Hello Veronica
>
> Thank you for this nice overview presentation.
>
> Please find my comments below.
>
> Slide2:
> Please include the references for "Lifetime …" and "Temperature…";
> It depends on different considerations so you need to cite the paper
> where you picked these numbers.
>
> What is "Slight color dipole"? "Slight"?
> quarkonium state -> quarkonium states
>
>
> Slide4:
> "Time of flight" -> Time of flight measurement
> (Because you have already used Time-of-flight at top)
>
> "…below TPC pT acceptance" -> "…at low pT" (TPC acceptance can go to
> low pT but detection not good)
>
>
> Slide8
> In this slide, you need to introduce what is "EA" and how do we
> measure in STAR briefly.
>
> within systematics -> within uncertainty
>
> Slide10:
> "Therefore, no CNM observed in J/ψ in small systems within systematics
> at
> high-pT"
> -> No CNM effect at high-pT  [better with less words]
> within systematics -> within uncertainty
>
>
> SLide12:
> "Energy loss at LHC is larger than at RHIC" How do you conclude this
> statement ?
>
>
>  Slide13:
> I would not encourage you to show these D^0 jet results because
> Diptanil showed at last collaboration meeting that our results have
> been changed due to some track selection cut.
> I understand these are "STAR preliminary" but we now know that results
> have been changed.
>
>
> SLide17:
> "No significant CNM effects at low pT in J/ψ" -> Is not that "at high
> pT" ?
> "Matched dijet asymmetry shows no angular dependence of jet energy
> loss" -> This is not in general. It is only in the case of hard-core
> jet selection. So please include this in this sentence
>
> Upsilon RAA -> Upsilon R_{AA}
>
>
> Cheers
> Nihar
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2023-03-23 07:03, webmaster--- via Star-hp-l 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

_______________________________________________
Star-hp-l mailing list
Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l