STAR HardProbes PWG

[Barbara Trzeciak <barbara.trzeciak AT gmail.com>]

Hi Isaac, All,

thanks for the update.

It looks good to me and I sign off with a minor comments

L24-29: "To achieve even ..." - this sentence is very long. Please split it in two.

Cheers,

Barbara

On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 8:00 PM Mooney, Isaac <isaac.mooney AT yale.edu> wrote:

Hi all,

I’m sorry for the delay. I’ve now addressed Yi’s comments and added a mention of OO back in. Please let me know if this is acceptable. 

Thanks!

-Isaac

On Apr 24, 2023, at 5:38 AM, Barbara Trzeciak via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi Rosi, All,

I agree that including O+O results would make the abstract interesting for a broader audience.

I would propose that PAs write a sentence on this, that doesn't promise too much, and we can review it and see what is acceptable for everyone. 

We plan to have another STAR abstract mentioning O+O data, so to same extent we should trust we can deliver something. And in case of issues with the O+O data, we have enough materials for this talk. 

Cheers,

Barbara

On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 5:39 AM Rosi Reed via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi Nihar,

I definitely agree we can always include more than we promise in a talk and that we certainly do have a lot of material, but it's a bit of a question of what will make them choose a particular abstract for a talk.  QM is hugely competitive in the HP sector, and while I personally think that the RHIC HP results are the most interesting, somehow there are people who want to see what TeV jets do....  But, O+O data has captured the interest of a large fraction of the LHC community, in addition to our colleagues on the sPHENIX side.  I think this will make the abstract more marketable.  It just needs to be phrased so that we're not promising something definitive in O+O....

Cheers,

Rosi

On Sun, Apr 23, 2023 at 11:23 PM Nihar Sahoo <nihar AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hello Rosi,
Thank you for email.
I am not reluctant mentioning about O+O data in the abstract, just
cautious.
as I mentioned we certainly include the O+O results if it would be ready
by then.
In the merged abstract we have lots of materials already.

Regards
Nihar


On 2023-04-24 01:40, Rosi Reed wrote:
> Hi Nihar,
> Thanks for your comments - I will let the others address them.  I just
> wanted to push back on your reluctance to state O+O explicitly.  There
> is always some back and forth on productions, but the STAR software
> team is good and already a new production with the fixes is being
> pushed out.  It's only April, the conference is in September.  While
> that's not a tremendous amount of time, it's also not a short while.
> We will be able to show something from O+O - even if it is only
> performance plots.  But I believe we'll be able to show some physics
> results, especially given the reduction in the background from the
> smaller size.  One of the nice aspects of the proposed analyses is
> that they are essentially ratios, and thus we dont' need to determine
> an absolute cross-section or any of the other difficult pieces that
> some analyses require.  In any case, I think having O+O in the
> abstract will drastically increase the chance that this abstract will
> be chosen for a talk given the huge community interest.  I don't think
> this is a particularly aggressive schedule, it would be a shame to
> remove this statement and have the abstract itself overlooked.
>
> Cheers,
> Rosi
>
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 2:50 AM Nihar Sahoo via Star-hp-l
> <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>
>> Hello Isaac, Tristan, Rosi, Nihar, Subhash:
>>
>> Please find my overall comments on your nice abstract.
>> I understand this is a bit complicated to write a coherent abstract
>> for
>> these multiple observables.
>>
>> Let me try to attempt shortening the abstract and cohere the physics
>>
>> messages.
>>
>> _Title needs some work.
>> 1. It doesn't cover jet v1 and v2 information
>> 2. "High-pT yield modification" doesn't make sense. something like
>> "modification of high-pt hadron yield"
>> How about?
>> "Measurement of high-pt hadron yield suppression and jet anisotropy
>> in
>> heavy-ion collisions at STAR"
>>
>> _ Abstract needs to be concise; introduction about jet and
>> jet-quenching
>> can be avoided for QM abstract.
>> everyone knows.
>> For example, line6-11 intro about jet and jet-quenching are not
>> needed.
>> We can directly use jet and the phrase jet-medium interaction here
>> to
>> make it concise.
>> Can you please make another try?
>>
>> _  (smaller O+O) -> not sure if we could show (or approve as STAR
>> preliminary for) at QM2023 due to some ongoing discussion on this
>> nascent O+O production.  I would prefer not to mention explicitly,
>> better to mention as "relatively smaller system". If we could have
>> results by then, we can include it in the presentation that should
>> not
>> be a problem.
>>
>> _ "In a larger system, we can test  whether the system-size
>> independence
>> of v1 observed previously by STAR also holds for jets. "
>> -> I would drop this sentence. This is a secondary point of the
>> motivation and not necessary to explicitly mention in this long
>> abstract. We can make the statement in the presentation.
>>
>> _ "Studying jet v2 … dependent quenching effects and the effects
>> which
>> give rise to anisotropies in even smaller p+A systems. "
>> -> "Studying jet v2 …. dependent quenching effects and the
>> effects."
>> We don't to have any discussion related to p+A system because we
>> don't
>> plan to present any p+A anisotropy results. And such discussion can
>> be
>> done in the presentation.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Nihar
>>
>> On 2023-04-18 08:40, webmaster--- via Star-hp-l wrote:
>>> Dear Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
>>>
>>> Isaac Mooney (isaac.mooney AT yale.edu) has submitted a material for
>> a
>>> review,
>>> please have a look:
>>> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/63433
>>>
>>> Deadline: 2023-05-01
>>> ---
>>> 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
>
> --
>
> Rosi Reed
> RHIC/AGS UEC member
> Associate Professor, Physics Department
> Lehigh University
> (610)758-3907
> 16 Memorial Drive East Office 406
> Bethlehem, PA 18015
> she/her/hers

--

Rosi Reed
RHIC/AGS UEC member
Associate Professor, Physics Department
Lehigh University
(610)758-3907
16 Memorial Drive East Office 406
Bethlehem, PA 18015
she/her/hers

_______________________________________________
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