STAR HardProbes PWG

[wy157543 AT mail.ustc.edu.cn]

Hi Isaac,

Thank you for your nice comments, The new version can be found at

https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/64965

for:

12. PHENIX should be removed from the legend since it's not shown now (also on 13).

How do we conclude that the double ratio is smaller than that in p/d+A collisions, since the only p/d+A datapoint that is at the same sqrt{s} as the isobar results is the d+Au which is consistent? Couldn't this be at least partially a conclusion about sqrt{s} in addition to isobar vs p/d+A? Especially since the p+Ag,W results are consistent with pp.

for d+A result, it hard to say due to the large uncertainty so, the statement "𝜓(2S) over J/𝜓 double ratio is smaller than that in p+A collisions" may be better.

-----原始邮件-----
发件人:"Mooney, Isaac" <isaac.mooney AT yale.edu>
发送时间:2023-09-04 04:28:48 (星期一)
收件人: "STAR HardProbes PWG" <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
抄送: "wy157543 AT mail.ustc.edu.cn" <wy157543 AT mail.ustc.edu.cn>
主题: Re: [Star-hp-l] STAR presentation by Yan Wang for Quark Matter 2023 submitted for review

Hi Yan,

The slides are looking quite good. I have a few small comments for your consideration. With these addressed, I sign off.

Thanks,

Isaac

3. MTD doesn't have a description underneath like the other subsystems.

7. "regenelation" -> "regeneration"

12. PHENIX should be removed from the legend since it's not shown now (also on 13).

How do we conclude that the double ratio is smaller than that in p/d+A collisions, since the only p/d+A datapoint that is at the same sqrt{s} as the isobar results is the d+Au which is consistent? Couldn't this be at least partially a conclusion about sqrt{s} in addition to isobar vs p/d+A? Especially since the p+Ag,W results are consistent with pp.

13. "seems to be more similar"

14. "significantly lower"

18. This still reads a little awkwardly after Barbara's comment at the rehearsal that it seems contradictory. Maybe try: 

> "\lambda_\theta, \lambda_\phi consistent with zero in HX and CS frames"

> "Hint of non-trivial p_T dependence in HX frame, but overall no significant p_T dependence in either HX or CS"

19. Would add an "as expected" to the end of the second bullet, since this is supposed to be the case.

21. It's a little confusing to have "J/\psi polarization study" in the outlook since you just showed a J/\psi polarization study. You could use something similar to Dandan's outlook where she mentions the future prospect of J/psi polarization w/r/t the event plane.

On Sep 3, 2023, at 8:19 AM, wy157543--- via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi all，

Thank you for your nice comments, The new version can be found at

https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/64965

best,

Yan

-----原始邮件-----
发件人:EsumiShinIchi <esumi.shinichi.gn AT u.tsukuba.ac.jp>
发送时间:2023-09-02 03:16:52 (星期六)
收件人: "STAR HardProbes PWG" <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
抄送: "wy157543 AT mail.ustc.edu.cn" <wy157543 AT mail.ustc.edu.cn>
主题: Re: [Star-hp-l] STAR presentation by Yan Wang for Quark Matter 2023 submitted for review

Dear Yan

I copied a comment from the google doc for your presentation 

on J/psi RAA energy dependence including SPS and LHC shown 

in the rehearsal today. 

Best regards, ShinIchi

https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/QM_2023_v7_1.pdf

S7: Legend missing for 62GeV

Why is it red for 54GeV? (add “preliminary”)

      17.3, 200, 5020 -> 17.3, 2760, 5020 GeV for Pb+Pb

2023/08/31 12:32、Barbara Trzeciak via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>のメール:

Hi Yan,

very nice slides.

I propose to use a log scale for the x-axis on the right plot on slide 5 - energy dependence of J/psi RAA vs Npart.

It should be easier to distinguish low Npart points, as for the colliding system scan on slide 8.

I also suggest to highlight in some color bullet points with important physics messages, that we want to highlight. 

Cheers,

Barbara

On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 9:21 PM Yi Yang via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi Yan,

Thanks a lot for the nice slides. I have some comments on v3 for your consideration. 

 - General: I would replace all "isobar" or "isobaric" to "Zr+Zr & Ru+Ru". 

 - p4: I remember we used 4B isobar data before, right?  

 - p7: Please indicate BHT2 is the new result for QM

 - p11: I don't think that we can say "Centrality dependence trend seems be closer to that at SPS than at LHC" with current statistics. Should we just say "They have similar centrality dependence"? 

 - p12: Second bullet, can you calculate the significance? It looks like a 2-3 sigma effect... 

 - p13: It would be good to show the Upsilon mass spectra from isobar data here. 

 - p14 -15: I would move J/psi polarization before the Upsilon results. I understand you want to separate them by physics topic, so it is up to you. 

 - p16: The ordering should be the same in your presentation, first talk about the J/psi in BES-II, then results from isobar. 

 - p17: run23-25 --> run 23-25

Cheers,

Yi

 

On Sun, Aug 27, 2023 at 1:56 PM webmaster--- via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

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

Yan Wang (wy157543 AT mail.ustc.edu.cn) has submitted a material for a review, 
please have a look:
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/64965

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://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l

_______________________________________________
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://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l