STAR HardProbes PWG

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

Hi Daniel,

Thanks for answering my questions. I should have guessed it was due to the Barlow test. I would say it’s fine to use the approach as-is for the preliminary for QM. Maybe in the future we could tinker a bit more. But Yi and Nihar let me know if you have a different opinion.

Thanks,

Isaac

On Aug 31, 2023, at 3:16 AM, Kikoła Daniel <Daniel.Kikola AT pw.edu.pl> wrote:

Hi Issack,

1) Your 2016 topological reconstruction cuts are centrality-dependent
but your analysis is for the full 0-80% range. Do you just average
the values from the 5 different ranges, or do you perform the
analysis in these 5 separate ranges and then add them all together?

We apply D0 reconstruction cuts as a function of centrality, but then
fill one set of raw Delta phi histograms (for F(D0)xF(D0bar),
F(D0)xB(D0bar), F(D0bar)xB(D0), B(D0)xB(D0bar)) for 0-80% events. Then,
we perform the final stages of the analysis using the centrality-
integrated distributions.
Thus, the results are effectively biased towards central collisions,
where the chance of finding a pair of D-meson candidates is higher.
Applying efficiency as a function of centrality and pT removes this
bias, but with the current statistics, it does not change the physics
conclusions.

2) I think Yi asked this in a meeting once, but I can’t remember the
answer: why do you have a large uncertainty from the side-band
background selection variation for Delta-phi of 0.31, but zero
contribution to the other four? Seems strange to me.

This is a consequence of applying the "Barlow approach"
(https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fabs%2Fhep-ex%2F0207026&data=05%7C01%7Cisaac.mooney%40yale.edu%7C1c2f90c7da76498e1f7608dba9fa8a76%7Cdd8cbebb21394df8b4114e3e87abeb5c%7C0%7C0%7C638290665958191911%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=c7HLBOeFuaep%2FaOHKmnqEqdb7o65%2Bb0zP5FtfFWoEdw%3D&reserved=0) to systematic uncertainty
estimation with an arbitrary threshold. I set the threshold of 2sigma
as a limit for possible statistical fluctuation, and only for one bin I
got an effect larger than 2 sigma (please see slide 25 in
https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https%3A%2F%2Fdrupal.star.bnl.gov%2FSTAR%2Fsystem%2Ffiles%2FD0-corr-AuAu200GeV-preliminary-request-16-08-2023.pdf&data=05%7C01%7Cisaac.mooney%40yale.edu%7C1c2f90c7da76498e1f7608dba9fa8a76%7Cdd8cbebb21394df8b4114e3e87abeb5c%7C0%7C0%7C638290665958191911%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=hTzqfwS2mQmBAHUSZMYl2ncOwElHUAsf%2BKohAPLI8fQ%3D&reserved=0
)

For the first bin, we have a 2.25 sigma difference between B1+B2 vs B1
background selection cases. It could still be a statistical fluctuation
since 2.25 sigma is not a significant effect. However, with the pre-set
threshold of 2 sigma, I took this as a systematic error.

Alliteratively, we could take the max. difference of B1+B2 vs B1 and
B1+B2 vs B2 as systematic uncertainty for all Delta phi bins, or drop
the uncertainty due to side-band background selection variation for the
first bin.

Best regards,
Daniel




On Thu, 2023-08-31 at 00:16 +0000, Mooney, Isaac wrote:

Hi Katarzyna and Daniel,

The preliminary proposal looks good to me. I have two small
questions, probably naïve.

1) Your 2016 topological reconstruction cuts are centrality-dependent
but your analysis is for the full 0-80% range. Do you just average
the values from the 5 different ranges, or do you perform the
analysis in these 5 separate ranges and then add them all together?

2) I think Yi asked this in a meeting once, but I can’t remember the
answer: why do you have a large uncertainty from the side-band
background selection variation for Delta-phi of 0.31, but zero
contribution to the other four? Seems strange to me.

Thanks!
-Isaac

On Aug 28, 2023, at 4:16 AM, Yi Yang via Star-hp-l
<star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Dear Katarzyna and Daniel,

Thanks a lot for the prompt reply. Looking forward to seeing the
updated request. 

Cheers,
Yi


On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 5:13 PM Kikoła Daniel
<Daniel.Kikola AT pw.edu.pl> wrote:

Dear Yi,

In addition to Katarzyna's response: we can estimate how much
data we
would need to observed a correlation signal in Au+Au, assuming
the same
reconstruction efficiency and a given level of stat. precision
(for
example 0.2).

Best regards,
Daniel  



-- 
Daniel Kikoła
Faculty of Physics,
Warsaw University of Technology
Koszykowa 75
00-662 Warsaw
(+48) 22 234 5851

On Mon, 2023-08-28 at 08:33 +0000, Gwiździel Katarzyna (DOKT) via
Star-
hp-l wrote:

Dear Yi,
 
We have done some predictions for measurement of angular
correlations
of charmed mesons at RHIC.
We came to the conclusion that the successful study of
azimuthal
correlations of charmed mesons 
should be possible in STAR using combined data from run 2017
and
2022.
 
When it comes to simulations. We compared the experimental
result
with the p+p baseline obtained with Herwig++. 
Daniel included this on his slides.
 
I hope this addresses your concerns.
 
Best regards,
Katarzyna
Od: Star-hp-l <star-hp-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov> w imieniu
użytkownika
Yi Yang via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Wysłane: poniedziałek, 28 sierpnia 2023 08:09
Do: STAR HardProbes PWG <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
DW: Yi Yang <yiyang0429 AT gmail.com>
Temat: Re: [Star-hp-l] D-Dbar azimuthal correlations in AuAu
200 GeV
- analysis update and preliminary figure request
 
Dear Daniel,
 
Thanks a lot for the preliminary request. 
Everything looks good to me. 
I am wondering if you can predict how much more data you need
to see
this correlation? If so, it would be nice to add in the
slides. 
I also remember someone (Rongrong?) suggested that mentioning
what we
expect to see from the simulation will be a good idea. You can
also
consider it. 
 
Cheers,
Yi
 
 
On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 2:25 PM Kikoła Daniel via Star-hp-l
<star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Dear All,
 
Time permitting, we would like to present a short analysis
update
on
the D-Dbar azimuthal correlations in AuAu 200 GeV at the
meeting
today
and discuss the preliminary figure request for this study.
 
Here are the slides for the presentation:
 
https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https%3A%2F%2Fdrupal.star.bnl.gov%2FSTAR%2Fsystem%2Ffiles%2FD0-corr-AuAu200G&data=05%7C01%7Cisaac.mooney%40yale.edu%7C1c2f90c7da76498e1f7608dba9fa8a76%7Cdd8cbebb21394df8b4114e3e87abeb5c%7C0%7C0%7C638290665958191911%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Mj4xQCaQFOjSZkK4SLVVIQRLdlM%2FibZfKo92GizYkLU%3D&reserved=0
eV-preliminary-request-16-08-2023.pdf
 
Best regards,
Daniel and Katarzyna
 
_______________________________________________
Star-hp-l mailing list
 Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
 https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https%3A%2F%2Flists.bnl.gov%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fstar-hp-l&data=05%7C01%7Cisaac.mooney%40yale.edu%7C1c2f90c7da76498e1f7608dba9fa8a76%7Cdd8cbebb21394df8b4114e3e87abeb5c%7C0%7C0%7C638290665958191911%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Ya9Bip7lvcsxOPIyvfY%2FpUcE%2FzXeqFWAMU4UoBYhVUM%3D&reserved=0

_______________________________________________
Star-hp-l mailing list
Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="https%3A%2F%2Flists.bnl.gov%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fstar-hp-l&data=05%7C01%7Cisaac.mooney%40yale.edu%7C1c2f90c7da76498e1f7608dba9fa8a76%7Cdd8cbebb21394df8b4114e3e87abeb5c%7C0%7C0%7C638290665958191911%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Ya9Bip7lvcsxOPIyvfY%2FpUcE%2FzXeqFWAMU4UoBYhVUM%3D&reserved=0

-- 
Daniel Kikola
Faculty of Physics,
Warsaw University of Technology
Koszykowa 75
00-662 Warsaw
(+48) 22 234 5851