STAR HardProbes PWG

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

Sorry for any potential confusion this causes, but after a discussion with Helen today, we think it would be better to show the centrality range 20-40%. There’s nothing wrong with the 40-60% per se — it’s just that the q2 resolution worsens due to the lower
 multiplicity (which was why we decided not to use the isobar data earlier). Including the 40-60% was done to increase statistical precision, but it turns out that the sacrifice is systematic precision. So I’ve instead uploaded https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/PreliminaryRequest_forQM23_AuAu2019_FINAL_2040cent.pdf
 which has the same preliminary plot request but for 20-40% instead. The trend we saw before is a bit stronger and the systematics on the higher pT are much better without too much worse statistics. I think this is a win-win, but understand that it’s coming
 late in the game so hopefully this is not too drastic of a change. Additionally, the “Figure 3” plot (slide 12) shows much better separation which will make an easier argument for using the EPD for q2.

Please let me know if there are any further comments.

-Isaac

On Aug 28, 2023, at 12:36 PM, Mooney, Isaac via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi all,

Here is my official preliminary request for the AuAu event shape engineered track spectra comparison with the 2019 200 GeV MB data: https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/PreliminaryRequest_forQM23_AuAu2019_FINAL.pdf

Please let me know if there are any further comments.

Thanks,

Isaac

_______________________________________________
Star-hp-l mailing list
Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l