STAR HardProbes PWG

[Nihar Sahoo <nihar AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>]

Hello Kaifeng,

Please fine my comments on nicely written paper draft:


I. Introduction:

L4: "…(QGP), can be produced in ultrarelativistic heavy-ion …" -> 
instead of "can be produced" , better to be more affirmed like "…(QGP), 
is produced in ultrarelativistic heavy-ion …" [Break this sentence make 
it two for better reading]
L10: "heavy quarks " -> better to mention what is heavy quarks in terms 
of temp. of the medium or QCD scale?
L13: "…deconfined hot medium." -> "…deconfined hot-dense QCD medium. "  
[Many places "hot medium" is used through out the paper., would not be 
good to use simply "QGP"? ]
"(re)generation" -> Why not directly use regeneration? [I understand 
that both can be possible] Or mention at least once. Otherwise it reads 
awkward with a repetition.
L13: "…include dissociation due to …" -> "…include dissociation of 
quarkonia due to …"

 2. Experiment and analysis:
L116-118: It would be good for reader to provide <Ncoll> and <Npart> 
values for centralities used in this analysis for 54.4 GeV [a short 
table probably]. Or If these numbers have been published in other 
analysis, please cite that STAR paper.
L131-132: "…with a mean of 0 and with of 1." -> Please correct this.
L172: "where a clear J/ψ peak is seen." -> "where a clear J/ψ peak is 
seen at  M_ee = X GeV/c2." Better to mention where is that peak.

Fig.1: Cosmetic comment:
 Bin width of Sys uncertainty can be plotted as the same with bin width 
of stat uncertainty.

 L241-246: Too long sentence. Please split them for better reading.

General:  No discussion on Global and <TAA> uncertainty in this section.

3. Results and discussion:
L256: You have already discussed about <Ncoll> in L116. No need to 
repeat here.
L259-262: Probably we need to quote the inclusive J/psi correction that 
we get from data-driven method for 54.4 GeV.
L270: in our new measurement. -> in this measurement. Or in the current 
measurement.

L292-294: "While comparison of two model calculations at 17.3 GeV, the 
transport model cal- culation from the Tsinghua group seems to 
underestimate the experimental measurements at 17.3 GeV." -> Would it be 
good to mention also about TAMU why it better predicts? Or physics in 
TAMU model?

L300: "..a flatter pT dependence of inclusive J/ψ RAA is seen at √sNN = 
200 GeV compared to lower energies, …" -> I would argue for 54.4 GeV the 
pT dependence is either similar with 200 GeV or some pT-dependence at 
low pT. In fact, 54 GeV is quite different trend compared with other 
lower energy. Something out of order. What do you think?

General on Fig.5:
We need to discuss why do we see rising trend, at 39 and 62.4 GeV, as a 
function pT, but not in the case of 54 GeV? Reader and referee may 
wonder.

_____On Analysis Note:

1. Please check if the Fig. Refs are corrected used. For example: L150: 
"…regions can be found in the Figure 37", this is a discussion on E/p 
ratio, suppose to be Fig.6. Please check also possible similar cases at 
other place.


Thank you
Nihar




On 2023-09-21 03:29, kshen via Star-hp-l wrote:
> Dear HP conveners,
>
>     This is a friendly reminder that the paper draft and analysis note
> were sent out approximately one month ago, if you have any comments or
> suggestions, please feel free to let us know.
>
> Best regards,
> Kaifeng for PAs
>
>
>
>
> On 2023-08-10 10:54, Kaifeng Shen via Star-hp-l wrote:
> > Dear HPs,
> >
> >   The paper draft and analysis note for “Measurement of inclusive
> > Jpsi production in Au+Au collisions at 54.4 at RHIC” are ready for
> > pwg review. The associated documents can be found as follows:
> >
> >    Webpage:
> > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/kshen/jpsi-production-auau-collisions-544-gev
> >
> >    Paper draft:
> > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/paper_draft_54p5_Jpsi_v14.pdf
> >
> >    Analysis note:
> >
> > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/analysis_note_for_inclusive_Jpsi_production_in_AuAu_collisions_at_54_4_GeV_v2.pdf
> >
> > We would appreciate it if you could review the documents and provide
> > us with your valuable comments and suggestions!
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Kaifeng for PAs
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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