STAR HardProbes PWG

[Tristan Protzman <tlp220 AT lehigh.edu>]

Hi Yi,

Thanks for the follow up.  I've made the changes and will upload a new version shorty also incorporating Helen and Isaac's comments.

Cheers,

Tristan 

On Aug 29, 2023, at 06:01, Yi Yang <yiyang0429 AT gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Tristan,

Thanks a lot for the updated version. I have some follow-up comments. 

 - The font size is bigger, but still a bit small to me, but probably is okay. 

I'll keep playing with it and maximize things as much as I can. 

 - jet resolution parameter --> jet resolution parameter (R) 

Changed

 - It is fine to me not including BEMC in the plot

 - I think we don't have enough statistics to state the R dependence, right? So I would change "No evidence for R dependence of jet 𝑣2 for hard core selected jets" to "No obvious R dependence of charged jet v2 for hard core selected jets with current statistics". What do you think? It's up to you. 

Softened the statement to "No evidence for R dependence of jet 𝑣_2 for hard core selected jets within large uncertainties"

Cheers,

Yi

On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 12:00 PM Tristan Protzman <tlp220 AT lehigh.edu> wrote:

Hi Yi, 

Thanks you for the comments.  Please find my responses in line.

Cheers,

Tristan 

On Aug 28, 2023, at 11:26 AM, Yi Yang via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi Tristan, 

Thanks a lot for the nice poster. I have some comments/suggestions for your consideration. 

 - General: I think the font size is a bit too small. It would be good if you can make them bigger. 

Increased font from 24->30

                  I think you are looking at charged jets, if so it would be good to make it clear. 

Added charged in front of jet v2 in abstract, isobar, and OO

 - Combinatorial jets: 4th bullet, define R and it would be good to put them in the same line. 

Replaced "R" with jet resolution parameter

 - STAR detector: indicate where ECAL is in the plot. 

I would prefer not to since that figure is already getting busy, but I can attempt to add it in

 - Do you have <Npart> for isobar and O+O in 20 - 60% centrality? 

The <Npart> in the OO is about 11 (https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/oo_cent_3_1.pdf), and in isobars is about 51 (https://arxiv.org/pdf/2109.00131.pdf).  I changed the statement to discuss the difference in npart rather that refmult

 - R dependence: are you planning to show the same results from O+O? I probably missed the discussion about it, if so, sorry about that.

No, given the larger uncertainties I have not done so.  Perhaps at a future point, but not for QM.

* Please send the preliminary request to the list (did I miss it?), thanks.

My apologies, I didn't realize the slides I presented for this last Thursday did not get attached to the page or sent around.  They can be found here, and I will follow up with an email to the list shortly:

star.bnl.gov

Cheers,

Yi

On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 4:33 PM webmaster--- via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

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

Tristan Protzman (tlp220 AT lehigh.edu) has submitted a material for a review, 
please have a look:
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/64873

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

_______________________________________________
Star-hp-l mailing list
Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://www.google.com/url?q=https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l&source=gmail-imap&ust=1693841232000000&usg=AOvVaw2wmS8SneH7py4bqbPLZffG