STAR HardProbes PWG

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

Hello Veronica,

Thank you for implementing my comments and answering.
We don't have time. I will push your talk to startalk.
I sign off.

On this point.
> > 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.

Yes, but from RCP measurement we can not conclude this. We need to do 
pT-shift comparison.
But you need to be careful quoting this based on Rcp comparison.

> > 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.

Let's go with the slide that you have now and see what is Rongrong's 
comment?

Enjoy the conference.
Nihar





On 2023-03-28 23:01, Veronica Verkest wrote:
> 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