star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
Subject: STAR HardProbes PWG
List archive
- From: suyuann AT mail.ustc.edu.cn
- To: "STAR HardProbes PWG" <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
- Cc: ephy <ephy AT ustc.edu.cn>
- Subject: [Star-hp-l] Replies to PWGC preview D0_RAA_isobar
- Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2023 22:01:21 +0800 (GMT+08:00)
Dear conveners and all,
As we had tried to fit the pi/kaon/p spectra in isobar by Blast-Wave function, we have implemented PWGC preview comments.
please find it at: https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/suyuann/RepliestoPWGCpreviewD0RAAisobar
If it's ok, we would like to put forward to PWG review.
Thanks and best regards,
Yuan
On 2023-05-16 04:23, Barbara Trzeciak via Starpapers-l wrote: > Date: 05/15/2023 > > Participants: Hanna Zbroszczyk, Toshihiro Nonaka, Jae Nam, Nihar > Sahoo, Issac Mooney, Yi Yang, Yue-Hang Leung, Subhash Shingha, > Shinichi Esumi, Yuan Su, Yifei Zhang, Sooraj Radhakrishnan, Barbara > Trzeciak > > Title: Measurements of inclusive D0-meson production in Isobar > collisions at √sNN = 200 GeV > PAs: Yuan Su, Yifei Zhang, Xiaolong Chen > Target journal: EPJC > Proposal page: > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/suyuann/Measurements-inclusive-D0-meson-production-Isobar-collisions-200-GeV > Presentation: > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/PWGC_D0_RAA_isobar_20230512_YuanSu_0.pdf > > The PWGC panel previewed a paper proposal from HP PWG. The panel found > that the analysis is mature and results are important and interesting, > and the paper should move forward. The journal choice was also found > to be appropriate. The following points were discussed. > > Q: R_AA comparison vs centrality or N_part, do we plan to show both, > what is the conclusion ? > A: We don’t have enough precision to say we are in agreement with > Au+Au at the same N_part or centrality interval. > > Q: Slide 17: There is large centrality dependence of the extracted T > and beta parameters for D0 and they are very similar for Au+Au and > isobars at the same centrality while one would expect the same > temperature for the same N_part. > A: The uncertainties are too large to draw conclusions. > > Q: D0 R_AA comparison to theory - which model is it ? > A: This is a new calculation for isobars using the framework from > TAMU, but it’s not published. > > Q: Why are there so high systematic uncertainties at low pT in Raa and > why is it asymmetric ? > A: Because there are no data points there for p+p, it comes from > extrapolation from the Levi function and uncertainties on this are > from fits of other functions. > > Q: Slide 16: light particles are from Au+Au ? Can we add isobar > results here ? > A: This is a good suggestion, but the pi/K/p results are not published > yet. > > Q: Slide 12: What are the three types of errors for Au+Au ? > A: The shaded bands are from N_bin uncertainties > > Q: Slide 12: Why does p+p have such large statistical errors ? > A: There is extrapolation involved. > > Q: Slide 17: Have you tried the same Blast-Wave fitting for p+p ? > Would be interesting to compare to HI results. > A: We can try to perform the fit. > > Q: Can we have a comparison of R_AA to the theory for Au+Au ? > A: Yes, it is published, we can add to the plot. > _______________________________________________
Star-hp-l mailing list Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l
- [Star-hp-l] Replies to PWGC preview D0_RAA_isobar, suyuann, 06/14/2023
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.