STAR HardProbes PWG

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

Hello Priyanka,

Thank you for addressing my comments.
I don't have any comment, I sign off.

Cheers
Nihar

On 2023-04-13 19:42, Roy Chowdhury Priyanka (DOKT) via Star-hp-l wrote:
> 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 [5]
>
>  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 [4]
> >
> > 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]
> > > > > > > [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 [2]
> > > > > > > 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 [3]
> > > > > > > Links:
> > > > > > > ------
> > > > > > > [1]
> > > > > > >
> > > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/GHP-2023_v2.pdf [1]
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Star-hp-l mailing list
> > > > > > > Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> > > > > > > https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l [3]
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Star-hp-l mailing list
> > > > > > Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> > > > > > https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l [3]
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Star-hp-l mailing list
> > > > > Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> > > > > https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l [3]
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Star-hp-l mailing list
> > > > Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> > > > https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l [3]
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1] https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/GHP-2023_v2.pdf
> [2] https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/63305
> [3] https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l
> [4] https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/GHP-2023_V3_1.pdf
> [5] https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/GHP-2023_V4.pdf
> _______________________________________________
> Star-hp-l mailing list
> Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l