STAR HardProbes PWG

[Tristan Protzman <tlp220 AT lehigh.edu>]

Hi Helen,

Thank you for the nice comments.  Please find my responses in line.  I'll upload a new draft shortly also reflecting Isaac and Yi's comments.  

Cheers,

Tristan 

On Aug 28, 2023, at 11:47 AM, Helen Caines <helen.caines AT yale.edu> wrote:

HI Tristan,

 Thanks for producing a nice first draft of your poster. Below are some comments to consider

Helen

General: You could increase the font side of all your text, you seem to have enough white space in each box.

Increased most fonts from 24->30

Abstract: 

 collectively known as the jet quenching —>  collectively known as jet quenching

he QGP takes an approximately —> the QGP initially takes an approximately

Changed

Jet v2:

Add to your cartoon how the variables phi and Psi_2 are defined. 

I'll keep playing with this, I haven't found a way to integrate it without making it too messy, but I don't want to hold up the rest of the comments on this point.

Combinatorial jets:

 I assume I am supposed to see that this is true from the figure with the toy model? It would be good to somehow refer to this figure and what is show in the text

Added a statement that the toy model features no jet proxies but still yields a significant jet v2

Bullets 3-5 describe the “hard core” technique, I therefore suggest to make them sub bullets.

The sqrt(delta(eta^2delta(phi)^2) comments refers to jets I believe. Would be good to make this clear given you take about constituents at the start of the sentence.

Didn’t you mention in the HP meeting that for the O+O you don’t modulate the flow, this should be made clear in the last bullet

I actually do still run it since that's what's in the analysis procedure I developed for the isobars, but you're right that it isn't actually affecting anything since rho is zero in the kinematic range I have selected.  I have moved the details of the rho subtraction from the combinatorial jet section to the isobar results section since that's where it applies.

Event Plane section:

The figure is for  |eta| or really only positive eta? 

|eta|, yes.  Changed.

RuRu and ZrZr results:

put high pT tracks in blue to match your text color coding for the jets?

Changed, thanks.

hard core matched jets —> hard core matched charged jets

Start of sentence change do "Positive charged jet 𝑣_2 observed for..."

O+O results:

to jet 𝑣, observed in p+Pb? —> to jet 𝑣, observed by ATLAS in sqrt(s_NN) =  8.16 TeV p+Pb collisions? [Since you call out ALICE above you should call out ATLAS here).

Added.

R dependence:

Suggest to call out in title that this is for the Isobars. Also suggest that this be moved above O+O panel so all the Isobar results are together. 

Clarified and rearranged.

No evidence for R dependence of jet 𝑣, for hard core selected jets [ I agree with this, but consider acknowledging that the uncertainties are still very large - is this a measurement you (or the next student not trying to hold up graduation) could repeat in Au-Au where we have good stats and the EPD now?

Added statement about uncertainties.  Yes, I suspect even with the shortened run a very nice jet v2 measurement could be done with the high statistics and better \psi_2 resolution in the 2023 AuAu data once it's produced.  

Summary: 

is mid-central  —> in mid-central 

is observed —> are observed

Given all the datasets STAR has, I suggest adding that again here that these measurements are for 200 GeV

Changed and added energy.  

Reference:

NN needs to be subscripted (twice)

Changed.

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

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