STAR HardProbes PWG

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

Hello Yan,

Please find my comments on your nice presentation slides.


Title:
Measurement of quarkonium production and polarization with the STAR 
experiment
->  I find this was your title "Beam energy and system size dependence 
of heavy flavor production at STAR"
And also it sounds more informative than what you have now.

Slide:2
probe to the -> probe of the Quark-Gluon Plasma (QGP)
Hot medium effects -> Hot QCD medium effects

Slide:4
Upper plot's x- and y-axis title and label are very small and will not 
be visible. Either increase their size or add texts.

Slide:5

_Left and right figures: Put "STAR preliminary" label inside .
_ Legend "54.4 (STAR preliminary)…" is not needed. Keep as other energy. 
Here 14.6-54 GeV/c are all STAR preliminary.
   But you need to give reference to 200 GeV
_ Left fig: "RAA increases with increasing 𝑝𝑇 for 14.6, 19.6, 27 and 
54.4 GeV" -> What about 200 GeV?
 I think one important observation : R_AA approaches to unity at beam 
energy around p_T 3-4 GeV/c
You could add one more bullet.
_"No significant energy dependence…" -> I would phrase it "No clear 
energy dependence is observed among 14.6, 19.6, 27, 54.4 and 200 GeV"

Slide6:
_ Legend "54.4 (STAR preliminary)…" is not needed. Keep as other energy. 
Here 14.6-54 GeV/c are all STAR preliminary.
_Left and right figures: Put "STAR preliminary" label inside .


Slide7:
"Consistent with Au+Au results for similar system size" -> Not clear 
"similar system size". Do you mean Au+Au and Isobar are similar size?

Slide10 and 11:
Y-axis label, Please increase the size. Or put a separate bigger text at 
Y-axis. In the current form, it is not visible.
Legends' size are too small. Definitely, audience can not see from 
distance. Please increase it.

Slide11: "Centrality dependence seems be closer to that at SPS than at 
LHC" -> It is not clear from this figure. Please rephrase exactly what 
you want to say.

Slide13:
Please increase the legends' size.

Slide16:
"No significant collision energy…" -> "No significant collision energy 
using BES-II data and system…"
[Just to draw attention that you have used BES-II energies]

Slide17:
_You need to introduce "ETOF, EPD"
_J/𝜓 𝑅 in Au + Au 17.3GeV for J/𝜓 energy dependence  -> "J/𝜓 𝑅 in Au + 
Au collisions at 17.3 GeV" is enough


Cheers
Nihar












On 2023-08-28 00:25, webmaster--- via Star-hp-l wrote:
> Dear Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
>
> Yan Wang (wy157543 AT mail.ustc.edu.cn) has submitted a material for a 
> review,
> please have a look:
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/64965
>
> Deadline: 2023-09-03
> ---
> 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