STAR HardProbes PWG

["Mooney, Isaac" <isaac.mooney AT yale.edu>]

Hi Priyanka,

Sorry for the delay. Below are some small comments I have for your poster.

Thanks,

Isaac

General comment: it's a bit on the wordy side. One example is the Motivation bullet: "One could interpret..."; this could be drastically shortened to e.g. "R ~ extent of interaction between charm, light quarks in a medium" [after in the first bullet saying "length, R,..."]. There are a few other places where this is possible, which would allow you to increase the figure, caption, and equation sizes, making everything more readable and more inviting from a distance. Just take a look at whether you see any other possibilities for abbreviating/trimming.

Abstract: "in relativistic..."; "Quark-Gluon Plasma"; "and the interaction of charm..."; "in 2014"

Motivation:

"Figure - 1" -> "Figure 1" (and throughout).

"emission source's length and area of homogeneity" as it currently reads like "area of X" where X is "homogeneity of emission source", which is confusing.

"of correlation function, C"

Figure 2 --

"for vacuum medium" -> "in the vacuum"

In the caption you say "expected shape of C(k*) but don't define k* until the next section. Maybe just move that first bullet from Methodology over to this section, just after the third bullet. Starting: "C is measured..." now instead. I understand things will have to move around a bit but hopefully you can make it work.

You say "Expected shape", but is it only the shape that we care about and not the magnitude of correlation?

Methodology:

Figure 3 --

Where is the "femtoscopic correlation" depicted in this figure?

D-hadron femtoscopy:

"D^\pm-\pi"

Figure 4 -- To me that doesn't look like a deviation at all if I respect the statistical and systematic uncertainties. Why not use the same-sign plot from slide 21 of the talk you link, where the data disagree more strongly with only Coulomb, and the LL curve is more distinct from the Coulomb?

"D^0 nuclear modification factor (R_AA)..." (Similar for next bullet)

"(v2) (fig. 5b) consistent with models"

"collisions"

Figure 5 -- The x-axes of these two plots are not on an identical scale, right? So you can cut off the x-axis title of the upper panel, but the numerical labels should stay visible.

D0 reconstruction at STAR:

"Figure 8 (a) and (b):"

If they're labeled (a) and (b) in the caption, you should add an (a) and (b) to the figures, as in Figs. 2 and 5.

On Jun 10, 2023, at 1:13 PM, Roy Chowdhury Priyanka (DOKT) via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi Nihar,

Thanks for your thoughtful comments. Sorry for the delay. Please check the updated version with the implementation of all your feedback.

https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/IS2023_poster_V2_Priyanka.pdf

Regards,

Priyanka

---

From: Star-hp-l <star-hp-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov> on behalf of Nihar Sahoo via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, June 7, 2023 3:01 PM
To: webmaster AT star.bnl.gov<webmaster AT star.bnl.gov>; STAR HardProbes PWG <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Subject: Re: [Star-hp-l] STAR presentation by Priyanka Roy Chowdhury for IS 2023 submitted for review

 

Hello Priyanka,

Please find my comments on your nice abstract below.


  I. Motivation:

"Charm-hadron __correlation__can " -> can you make some adjustment to 
avoid the extra gaps?
Please indicate if these plots are for QGP medium or vacuum.
Introduce QGP here, a short sentence. [or in the abstract mention "the 
Quark Gluons Plasma (QGP)."]


II. Methodology
distribution respectively for correlated -> distribution, respectively, 
for correlated
Event mixing technique to calculate k* for uncorrelated pairs -> Event 
mixing technique to calculate uncorrelated pairs k* …

III. D-hadron femtoscopy

Data suggest .. -> ALICE preliminary data suggest … or ALICE data 
suggest
FIg.4 -> Please include "ALICE preliminary" on this plot indicating this 
is from ALICE preliminary.
strong interaction of c/c with -> Not clear what is "c/c"?

IV. D0 reconstruction at STAR
Figure - 7: D0 decay channel -> Figure - 7: D0 decay topology

V. Analysis & Outcomes
Detector effects corrections: -> TPC detector effects correction:
max. possible no. -> maximum possible number
Fig.10 left -> T_1,2 -> Track_1,2

VI. Summary

How should the correlation functions look like in heavy-ion collisions? 
->

For heavy-ion collisions, QGP and hadronic phase effects on two-particle 
correlations are 
unknown
  -> In heavy-ion collisions, the contribution of QGP and hadronic phase 
to D meson+hadron correlation functions is not well understood. (or well 
studied)

First experimental analysis ->  First measurement

Model study (ex. Lednický–Lyuboshitz) is on the plan to extract 
interaction parameters, like emission source size -> Plan to extract 
interaction parameter, like emission source size, using 
Lednický–Lyuboshitz model.

input on interactions -> input to the interaction …

Model calculations needed that include -> Theoretical inputs are needed 
that include



Cheers
Nihar





On 2023-06-06 17:59, webmaster--- via Star-hp-l wrote:
> 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/63885
> 
> Deadline: 2023-06-19
> ---
> 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