STAR HardProbes PWG

[gaohan_yang <gaohan_yang AT m.scnu.edu.cn>]

Hi Nihar, Yi and Barbara

Thank you for your nice and valuable comments. I have implemented them in the updated version under the same link:

https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/presentations/ATHIC-2023/Measurement-Upsilon-production-heavy-ion-collisions-top-RHIC-energy-STAR-de

Best regards,

Gaohan 

	gaohan_yang
gaohan_yang AT m.scnu.edu.cn

---- Replied Message ----

From Barbara Trzeciak<barbara.trzeciak AT gmail.com> Date 4/19/2023 15:36 To Nihar Sahoo<nihar AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov> ,
STAR HardProbes PWG<star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> Cc gaohan_yang<gaohan_yang AT m.scnu.edu.cn> Subject Re: [Star-hp-l] STAR presentation by Gaohan Yang for ATHIC 2023 submitted for review

Hi Gauhan,

thanks for the update and responses. The slides look very nice. 

I sign off the following comments:

- s3: Remove dots at the end of the sentences to be consistent with the rest of the slides.

in the RHIC energy -> at RHIC energies

ccbar: Sizable CNM effect(other than NPDF) - these effects are significant for J/psi at low pT < 2 GeV/c, and I don't think we know that the effects beyond nPDFs are sizable - our data are consistent with nPDFs only as well. 

bbar: we don't really know how much of different CNM effects we have. 

Therefore, I would suggest removing CNM from the boxes and adding a bullet about  the CNM effect outside of the boxes, e.g.:

- Other effects: Cold Nuclear Matter (CNM), medium-induced energy loss, feed-down ...

For bbbar you can add a bullet in the box, e.g.: "Sequential suppression -> cleaner "QGP thermometer"

- s5: Increase a bit the size of the text.  

You have twice "(dotted line)" in the 3rd bullet. 

- s7: observed with that in Au+Au -> observed in isobar and in Au+Au

in 0-80% isobar collisions is observed -> in 0-80% isobar collisions

Plot: missing space between "Isobar" and  "\sqrt{s_NN}"

- s8: System dependence of R_AA -> System dependence of R_AA at 200 GeV

I suggest adding a conclusion bullet:  No significant species dependence of the suppression at similar <N_part>

Plot: Add energy of the collisions

- s9: R_AA distribution as a function -> R_AA as a function

No significant pT dependence -> No significant pT dependence in Au+Au and isobar collisions

Add the paper reference to the Au+Au plot

- s10: and RHIC collision energies -> and RHIC Au+Au collision energies

less suppression of Υ(2S) -> less suppression of Υ(2S) at RHIC

- s12: remove "(Coupled Boltzmann eq is also consistent)"

Cheers,

Barbara

On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 9:00 AM Nihar Sahoo via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hello Gaohan,

Thank you for preparing this nice presentation.
I have minor comments below and with these implemented I sign off.

Slide-4:
"Barrel Electro Magnetic Calorimeter" -> "Barrel ElectroMagnetic
Calorimeter"
Slide-11
Please provide references to all these models

Cheers
Nihar



On 2023-04-18 23:11, gaohan_yang via Star-hp-l wrote:
> Hi, Barbara
>
> Thank you for your valuable comments and patient response.  I have
> implemented them and uploaded version2 on the Drupal page which can be
> found in this link:
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/Athic_Upsilon_Production_V2_0.pdf
>
>
> Please see my detailed responses inline:
>
> |-General suggestion for your consideration: you don't necessarily
> need to divide your presentation into Au+Au and isobar -> you can show
> the published results in Au+Au, then isobar and isobar compared to
> Au+Au, and then model and LHC comparisons at the end.
> — I have adjusted the order and content of the slides according to
> your comments. If you have any other suggestions, please let me know.
> |-Why in the table do you specifically show 30-60% for Au+Au and 0-80%
> for Ru+Ru and Zr+Zr ?
> I would rather show for which centrality bins that you have the
> <N_coll> are similar between the systems.
> — Yes, we compared the two systems based on the number of  similar
> N_parts. Maybe my table didn't explain it clearly. But that's okay,
> I've removed this slide now.
> |-And is it possible to estimate the Upsilon(3S) upper limit for
> isobars ?
>
> — Considering the large uncertainties of Y(2S) and negative Y(2S)
> yield in isobar collisions, estimate the Upsilon(3S) upper limit won't
> make significant physics impact. We prefer not to draw the Y(3S) upper
> limit .
>
> Best,
> Gaohan
>
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 11:52 AM webmaster--- via Star-hp-l
> <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>
>> Dear Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
>>
>> Gaohan Yang (gaohan_yang AT m.scnu.edu.cn) has submitted a material for
>> a
>> review, please have a look:
>> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/63345
>>
>> Deadline: 2023-04-24
>> ---
>> 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