STAR HardProbes PWG

["Roy Chowdhury Priyanka (DOKT)" <priyanka.roy_chowdhury.dokt AT pw.edu.pl>]

Hi Barbara,

Thanks a lot for all the nice comments. The corrected version is uploaded here https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/GHP-2023_V4.pdf

Regards,

Priyanka

---

From: Barbara Trzeciak <barbara.trzeciak AT gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2023 2:44 PM
To: Roy Chowdhury Priyanka (DOKT) <priyanka.roy_chowdhury.dokt AT pw.edu.pl>
Cc: STAR HardProbes PWG <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Subject: Re: [Star-hp-l] STAR presentation by Priyanka Roy Chowdhury for GHP 2023 submitted for review

 

Hi Priyanka,

Thanks for the update. Please see below my remaining comments. 

With these addressed I sign off.

- s7: Nature 527 (2015) 345 -> STAR, Nature 527 (2015) 345

- s8: use a better quality plot. 

- s8: Phys. Rev. C 88 (2013) 34906 -> STAR, Phys. Rev. C 88 (2013) 34906

- s9: Instead of the 2nd and 3rd bullet points: "Within sizable uncertainties: ➔ D± -proton and D ... ",

I would suggest a general motivation for a measurement in p+p as an example of what can be done with charm femtocopic correlations, in terms of a general idea as I wrote before, as I think might be interesting for the audience, e.g.:

        - Search for new molecular states

        - Measurement of scattering lengths of interactions between charm mesons and light hadrons -> small values found suggest small role of D meson re-scattering in the hadronic phase of heavy-ion collisions (instead of "Overall: data ... ")

- s9: Remove reference to plots, and leave only to the QM presentation.

- s11: I would remove this slide. Doesn't the right plot on slide 12 tell the same story ? 

- s12: M. Albaladejo ,J. Nieves -> M. Albaladejo, J. Nieves

- s14: Ref. - STAR: PRC 99, -> STAR, PRC 99,

- s14: D0 proper decay length is ~123 mu m

- s16: with 0-80% centrality and |Vz| < 6 cm -> in 0-80% centrality range

- s18: I would remove "In order to eliminate this effect it is necessary ..." 

Cheers,

Barbara

On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 1:49 PM Roy Chowdhury Priyanka (DOKT) <priyanka.roy_chowdhury.dokt AT pw.edu.pl> wrote:

Dear Barbara, Nihar, Yi, all,

Thank you for the comments. I have implemented all your suggestions. Please find my modified slides here https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/GHP-2023_V3_1.pdf

Regards,

Priyanka

---

From: Star-hp-l <star-hp-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov> on behalf of Barbara Trzeciak via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2023 1:19 PM
To: Kikoła Daniel <Daniel.Kikola AT pw.edu.pl>; STAR HardProbes PWG <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Subject: Re: [Star-hp-l] STAR presentation by Priyanka Roy Chowdhury for GHP 2023 submitted for review

 

Hi Daniel,

thanks for the explanation.  

I understand your point about the conclusions from the ALICE measurement and its importance for HI measurement. I would just not go towards too many details of their measurement.

I would suggest two following bullets.

- The general motivation for a measurement in p+p as an example of what can be done with charm femtocopic correlations, in terms of a general idea as I wrote before, as I think might be interesting for the audience.  

- And then you can say that they found very small values of the scattering length which indicates a small rescattering of D mesons in the hadronic phase of heavy-ion collisions - important for our studies. 

I think it's fine to have speculations with a question mark.

Cheers,

Barbara

On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 1:03 PM Kikoła Daniel via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi Barbara and Nihar,

Many thanks you for your comments and suggestions.

For the physics motivation part of Priyanka's talk, our idea was as
follows:
1. Femtoscopic correlations provide information about the size of the
emission source and interactions
2. Large source size is compatible with the emission of particles from
a thermalized fireball (and here is the example for kaons and
hydrokinetic model), but one needs proper model calculations to
interpret the experimental results.
3. ALICE measured D-meson - hadron femtoscopy, and they found that the
effect of strong interactions between D-meson and light-hadrons is
small.
4. ALICE concluded that the scattering parameters found for interaction
between charm mesons and light hadrons suggest no important hadronic
phase for heavy-flavour hadrons in heavy-ion collisions (please see
slide 21 and 23 in
https://indico.cern.ch/event/895086/contributions/4715876/attachments/2422161/4146005/QM22_charmfemto_fgrosa.pdf
) (with the caveat of sizable uncertainties)
5. Thus, D-hadron femtoscopic correlation in heavy-ion collisions
should probe the system size.
6. Then the main question is how to interpret the small or large
measured source size, and we provide some speculations.
7. I fully agree that the statement on slide 12: "Large source size →
thermalization of charm quarks with the QGP medium" is a stretch based
on light-flavor results.

What about adding a question mark at the end of that statement to
emphasize that we need an actual model calculation to draw
conclusions?e need an actual model calculation to draw any conclusions?

Best regards,
Daniel




On Wed, 2023-04-12 at 12:07 +0200, Barbara Trzeciak via Star-hp-l
wrote:
> Hi Priyanka,
>
> very nice slides. Please see below my comments.
>
> Please remove the university and faculty logo from slides (except the
> first one), add STAR logo istead. 
> - s5: I would introduce here how the correlation function is measured
> in an experiment. Otherwise slide 17 is very empty. 
> - s5: why is the Coulomb interaction in red ? 
> - s6: improve the quality of equations. 
> - s9-10: it's nice to show the ALICE results as an example. But I
> wouldn't go into so much detail of explaining the result. I think one
> slide and two example plots should be enough.
> And I think, but correctly if I'm wrong, that the main idea behind
> these studies of residual strong interaction between charm and light
> hadrons is twofold (1) measuring scattering lengths for ND - this is
> also important input for HI for transport models; (2) search for new
> molecular states. 
> - s11-12: I'm not sure if I follow your motivation for HI. The cited
> papers are related rather to hadronic physics - search for the exotic
> hadrons. Could you explain to me how you get statements on slide 12
> from this paper and the plots - apologies if I'm missing something.
> And do you need slide 11 ?
> - s15: you don't need the table with all the cut values, you can just
> write above your bullet points: "Topological selection cuts for D0
> reconstruction". 
> I would make the decay sketch larger and add what is the proper decay
> length of D0.
> - s16: since you write "Very good signal/background ratio", I would
> add values of S/B on your invariant mass plots. 
> Since you don't show further results, instead of "D0 invariant mass
> ..." bullet you can write what functions you use for your signal and
> background fits. 
> - s18: we applied following condition -> we applied the following
> condition for TPC tracks. Also, maybe you have some cartoon showing
> split tracks. 
> - s19: what is missing here is some explanation of what are merged
> tracks and how they can affect the correlation function. You have
> detailed explanation of split tracks on the previous track, so this
> slide 19 is a bit in contrast with slide 18.
> - s20: input on of charm quarks -> input on of charm quark
> interaction
> One will need model calcinations that include details of charm
> interactions with the QGP -> Model calculations needed 
>
> Cheers,
> Barbara
>
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 11:33 PM Mooney, Isaac via Star-hp-l
> <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
> > Hi Priyanka,
> >
> > I have a small comment on your interesting slides that you’re free
> > to disregard if you disagree with it.
> > Is slide 17 really necessary? Since you go on to finish with a
> > discussion of detector effects and then summarize, but don’t
> > explicitly bring up C(k*) again, it seems a bit extraneous. Also
> > visually it’s interesting because more than half of it is white
> > space (maybe there’s an animation that doesn’t appear in the pdf?)
> > I think if you did want to leave in some discussion about the
> > experimental construction of this observable, it would make sense
> > to include it at the end of slide 12. In my opinion, this would be
> > a good flow: for C(k*) we need theory and experiment — theory
> > should include important details in the calculation as you mention,
> > and experimentally we need an appropriate working definition of the
> > observable, namely the one currently on s. 17. You then get a nice
> > transition to the experimental methods section of the talk which
> > begins on the next slide.
> >
> > Either way, good luck on the talk!
> > -Isaac
> >
> > PS “calcinations” -> “calculations” on s. 20.
> >
> > > On Apr 11, 2023, at 10:16 AM, Nihar Sahoo via Star-hp-l
> > > <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello Priyanka,
> > >
> > > Thank you for preparing this nice presentation and it looks good
> > > to motivate your work.
> > > Please find my comments on your presentation slides.
> > >
> > > Slide1:
> > > Title - " …Au+Au@200 GeV" -> "…Au+Au \sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 200 GeV"
> > >
> > > Slide2:
> > > _ "Suppression of production of D0 meson at " -> " Suppression of
> > > D^0 meson at …"
> > > _ "and significant level of thermalization " -> "and its
> > > thermalization"
> > > _ "Current data does not sufficiently discriminate between
> > > models" -> "Need new observables to constrain different models
> > > and understand production mechanisms"
> > > _New observables … -> Drop it, you have mentioned above
> > >
> > > Slide5:
> > > "Coulomb interaction" Is there reason to make it red color? If
> > > yes, better to mention here.
> > >
> > > SLide7:
> > > In Title  remove one "from"  (Same for slide8)
> > >
> > > Slide10:
> > > "Overall: data suggest small role of D hadronic re-scattering in
> > > heavy-ion collisions" ->Where do you get this conclusion? Please
> > > provide the reference. I don't see such statement from ALICE QM22
> > > presentation. I probably missed.
> > >
> > > Slide11:
> > >
> > > Not for this presentation, but for the future and for your
> > > analysis,
> > > Can you contact these theorists to have similar calculation for
> > > your analysis kinematics?
> > >
> > > Slide14:
> > > Remove "Figure 7 : Particle identification using TPC (left) and
> > > TOF (right)"
> > > And make it large text "Particle identification using TPC (left)
> > > and TOF (right)"
> > >
> > > Slide18:
> > > "Correction of detector effects" -> I would say "Experimental
> > > challenges"
> > > Because "Self correlation" is not a detector effect.
> > >
> > > "No. of hit points / Max no. of hit points > 0.51"  this is too
> > > technical.
> > > You could add a sentence "Additional track selection criteria"
> > >
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > Nihar
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2023-04-10 14:44, Roy Chowdhury Priyanka (DOKT) via Star-hp-l
> > > wrote:
> > > > Dear Convenors,
> > > > I sincerely apologize for the delay in uploading the slides for
> > > > review. My talk has been rescheduled to Friday, April 14th.
> > > > Looking
> > > > forward to your comments and suggestions.
> > > > You can find my slides here
> > > > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/GHP-2023_v2.pdf
> > > > [1]
> > > > Thank you.
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Priyanka
> > > > -------------------------
> > > > From: Star-hp-l <star-hp-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov> on behalf of
> > > > webmaster--- via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
> > > > Sent: Monday, April 10, 2023 11:01 AM
> > > > To: Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov <Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
> > > > Subject: [Star-hp-l] STAR presentation by Priyanka Roy
> > > > Chowdhury for
> > > > GHP 2023 submitted for review
> > > > Dear Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
> > > > Priyanka Roy Chowdhury (priyanka.roy_chowdhury.dokt AT pw.edu.pl)
> > > > has
> > > > submitted
> > > > a material for a review, please have a look:
> > > > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/63305
> > > > Deadline: 2023-04-12
> > > > ---
> > > > If you have any problems with the review process, please
> > > > contact
> > > > webmaster@http://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
> > > > Links:
> > > > ------
> > > > [1]
> > > > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/GHP-2023_v2.pdf
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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

--
Daniel Kikola
Faculty of Physics,
Warsaw University of Technology
Koszykowa 75
00-662 Warsaw
(+48) 22 234 5851
_______________________________________________
Star-hp-l mailing list
Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l