STAR HardProbes PWG

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

Hi Diptanil,

After Helen’s thorough comments, I don’t have many more. The poster is in a good shape now. Please see a few comments below. I sign off.

Thanks,

Isaac

> Not sure it really makes sense to say the LIDO trend is "similar to jet pT spectra" (trend). The overall level of agreement with peripheral and central data is similar, but trend in z can't really be compared to trend in pT. 

> I also think since you compare to LIDO in every single result plot, you should explain it a bit before then pointing the interested reader to the reference. Could just be one sentence or less but something would be good, so someone can tell what it means physically when LIDO agrees/disagrees with data.

> I shared Helen's confusion about the "MPI important for low..." bullet point. It might be good to add a reference after this which just says "<Lido author's name>, personal communication, <date>" so people can see that it's not something they should be able to understand from the plot alone.

On Aug 28, 2023, at 11:13 PM, Diptanil Roy via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi Helen, thank you for your feedback. I have implemented most of the stylistic changes you suggested. The new version is here: https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/QM2023_Poster_Diptanil_36x48_v3.pdf

Please find some inline comments below.

“Extracting D0 Meson Tagged Jet Yield” Panel:

If I understood correctly you are missing mentioning the final step to extract the yield. Don’t you need to then integrate s_P_1 over the whole m_k,pi range and then scale by NEvents?

I also think it would be worth mentioning that you have T=2, because you assume a gaussian  for the signal and a pol3 for the background?

A: Yep, you are right, that step should be there for the final spectra, but for this panel, I just wanted to show the raw counts, hence I didn't scale with NEvents. Also, for sPlot, I use all the unlike sign counts in the whole m_k,pi range.

I already have the "T=2" bit mentioned in the model parameters. I have made that bold in this iteration.

pT Spectrum Panel:

How do you conclude that MPI is important for low E charm yields? Your plot says MPI is off for LIDO and it agrees well with the data. I’m also not sure why you say low energy when you are contrasting peripheral and central events. Does that fact that it agrees well with LIDO in peripheral data mean there’s lots of quenching even there?

A:  LIDO agrees really well in the peripheral events, but in central, it underpredicts slightly in the central events. The RCP from LIDO is below what we measure at STAR, and that is mostly driven by the difference in central events. I showed in the Hard Probes Meeting that for 5 < pT,D < 10 GeV/c, LIDO agrees well in central events too. I asked the author of LIDO if he had any insight into this, and he suggested that at low pT,D, MPI effects are important (based on his studies), and the small difference in central events would probably go away once we compare to a sample of LIDO with MPI on. That's why I have that open-ended question about MPI being important at low pT,D. I rephrased 'low energy charm' to 'low p_{T,D0}' to make the point clearer. Please let me know if you would want me to change it to something else.

How does the peripheral data compare to scaled PYTHIA?

A. Please find this plot below. The magenta curve is what I get from PYTHIA after TAA scaling. I am generating a larger PYTHIA sample (with jet pT > 5 GeV for D0 pT > 1) to make sure the normalisations are correct, but the shape should be the same.

 <Screenshot 2023-08-28 at 10.20.56 PM.png>

Fragmentation Function Panel:

Its not true this is the first z measurement of D0 in jet. See for example JHEP06(2023)133.pdf 

A: Apologies for this, I wanted to state 'first z measurement in HI', but I have now dropped this statement altogether, and added a statement about the z-spectra being 2D unfolded.

You say the FF is only suppressed for central events, the mid-central suppression is essentially as significant (both really only hints) once all the uncertainties are combined.

A: This was mostly because of space. I have now changed 'central' to 'central/midcentral'. 

 

D0 Radial Profile:

Related to LIDO does it agree with the LHC results? i.e. does theory expect that this variable only becomes sensitive to diffusion effects at energies > RHIC?

A: So, they already showed this comparison here (https://arxiv.org/pdf/2008.07622v1.pdf). The conclusion was that the jets in Pb-Pb were found to be narrower than expected (from data), but it's very hard to make out any significant differences as such. However, based on what we saw from CCNU (the model that CMS compares to), the diffusion seems to be lower than that seen in LHC. Unfortunately, I don't have the CCNU plots for the kinematic ranges we are showing, but for the paper, we plan to include them.  

Please let me know if you have more comments.

Thank you. 

On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 9:54 AM Helen Caines <helen.caines AT yale.edu> wrote:

HI Neil,

I was asked to look over your nice poster. Below are some suggestions for you to consider.

Helen

“Extracting D0 Meson Tagged Jet Yield” Panel:

If I understood correctly you are missing mentioning the final step to extract the yield. Don’t you need to then integrate s_P_1 over the whole m_k,pi range and then scale by NEvents?

I also think it would be worth mentioning that you have T=2, because you assume a gaussian  for the signal and a pol3 for the background?

pT Spectrum Panel:

How do you conclude that MPI is important for low E charm yields? Your plot says MPI is off for LIDO and it agrees well with the data. I’m also not sure why you say low energy when you are contrasting peripheral and central events.

Does that fact that it agrees well with LIDO in peripheral data mean there’s lots of quenching even there? How does the peripheral data compare to scaled PYTHIA?

Fragmentation Function Panel:

Given you define z in both the figures you maybe don’t also need the definition in the red box.

Its not true this is the first z measurement of D0 in jet. See for example JHEP06(2023)133.pdf

The red highlighting of your last two bullet points is inconsistent. Suggest to highlight the hard/soft and suppressed/consistent with  1 parts of the sentences only.  No need to highlight D0 jet yield or central events.

You say the FF is only suppressed for central events, the mid-central suppression is essentially as significant (both really only hints) once all the uncertainties are combined.

D0 Radial Profile:

You never tell the audience what Delta(R) means

You mention that the radial profile is unfolded but don’t mention this for the FF, does that mean its not unfolded?

I suggest to move the comment about the LHC results to a sub bullet when you report what you see in the ratio, in this way your nice results are what the audience sees and thinks about first

You have two bullet that say your results are consistent with LIDO, you really only need one. Related to LIDO does it agree with the LHC results? i.e. does theory expect that this variable only becomes sensitive to diffusion effects at energies > RHIC?

***********************

Yale University
Physics Dept. - Wright Lab.
PO Box 208120
New Haven, CT 06520
203-432-5831
***********************
she/her/hers
"Life is not about waiting for the storms to pass.
It's about learning how to dance in the rain." - Vivian Greene

On Aug 25, 2023, at 12:58 PM, Diptanil Roy via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi everyone, I made some stylistic changes to the poster. The updated version is here: https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/QM2023_Poster_Diptanil_36x48_v2.pdf

Please let me know your comments on the same.

Thank you.

On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 12:08 AM Diptanil Roy <roydiptanil AT gmail.com> wrote:

Hi everyone, please find my poster contribution here. https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/QM2023_Poster_Diptanil_36x48_v1.pdf

I have put the most recent versions of the preliminary plots on the poster, please let me know if you have any suggestions/comments on the plots. The latest preliminary request version is available here: https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/PreliminaryRequest_QM_Aug20_2023_v3.pdf.

In addition, I added a raw D0 yield plot. Please let me know if I need to request a preliminary for that plot.

Thank you.

On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 11:52 PM webmaster--- via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Dear Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,

Diptanil Roy (roydiptanil AT gmail.com) has submitted a material for a review,  
please have a look:
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/64867

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

-- 

~ Neil

-- 

~ Neil

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

-- 

~ Neil

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