STAR HardProbes PWG

[Yi Yang <yiyang0429 AT gmail.com>]

Hi Priyanka,

Thanks a lot for the preliminary request. I have some comments/questions for your consideration. 

 - I shared the same confusion as Barbara, could you please clarify them? I am also surprised that the 3% uncertainty based on the fit in your study slides. Could you please tell us more about it? 

 - I am confusing myself a bit when I read your request, could you please tell me how you get the reduced p for D0? 

 Regarding the request: 

 - Please add your advisor's name and email to the slide. 

 - From your poster, you mentioned 2016 data, but now I think you only concentrate on the 2014 data, right? If so, please change your poster. 

 - p10: could you please summarize the standard, loose, and tight cuts in a table (or readable format, instead of coding style)? 

 - Preliminary plot: 

     - central --> centrality 

     - remove the box around "Au+Au, STAR" and change it to "data"   (you have Au+Au in the bottom) 

     - you can try to use "boxes" for the systematics instead of "parentheses" since some bins look strange (0.03, 0,17, 0.27).  

     - physics message: I agree with Barbara that we should say "It is consistent with no correlation with current statistics (2014)". You can mention the potential by adding 2016 data in your poster.      

 

Cheers,

Yi

On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 10:20 AM Barbara Trzeciak via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi Priyanka,

I have questions on your purity correction. 

- Why does your correlation function have no statistical uncertainties before the purity correction and has sizable uncertainties after the correction ?  Also the plot says D0-pi pairs but I thought you wanted to approve the D0-K correlation function. I'm a bit confused here.  Also, I don't see any uncertainties on your kaon purity plot, so I don't understand how it can influence your statistical uncertainty.

Kaon purity: 

- how 3% uncertainty was evaluated here, I would expect that in the overlap region, at ~0.6-0.8, the sys. unc. is be large .

- The purity is up to 1 GeV/c, what do you assume for the higher pT range ? 

- And as far as I understand you use average. But do you know what Kaon pT dominates your sample ? Do you have any Kaon pT selection in the data analyses ? 

- How do you have 10% on the pair purity ? 

Physics message. I would say that the data are consistent with no correlation, rather than with any of these pp models. 

Also, you make a conclusion on the correlation source size. But do we know that the correlation function is not modified in HI compared to pp ? 

Cheers,

Barbara

On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 5:08 PM Barbara Trzeciak <barbara.trzeciak AT gmail.com> wrote:

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: "Roy Chowdhury Priyanka (DOKT)" <priyanka.roy_chowdhury.dokt AT pw.edu.pl>
To: Star-hp-l <star-hp-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov>
Cc: 
Bcc: 
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2023 14:19:45 +0000
Subject: Preliminary figure request for D0-K femtoscopic correlation

Dear Convenors,

I have submitted a request for preliminary label on my D0-K correlation function. My slides are here https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/QM_proposal_PreliReq_Priyanka.pdf

I updated the poster with the same figure as "fig 10" on my submitted poster draft. I will upload the new version of the poster ASAP.

Regards,

Priyanka

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