STAR HardProbes PWG

["Roy Chowdhury Priyanka (DOKT)" <priyanka.roy_chowdhury.dokt AT pw.edu.pl>]

Hi Nihar,

Do you mean "pD" in bullet 1 on slide 4? Should I write proton-D instead of pD pair?

Regards,

Priyanka

---

From: Nihar Sahoo <nihar AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>
Sent: Friday, November 3, 2023 1:38 PM
To: Roy Chowdhury Priyanka (DOKT) <priyanka.roy_chowdhury.dokt AT pw.edu.pl>
Cc: STAR HardProbes PWG <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>; webmaster AT star.bnl.gov <webmaster AT star.bnl.gov>
Subject: Re: [Star-hp-l] STAR presentation by Priyanka Roy Chowdhury for WPCF 2023 submitted for review

 

Hello Priyanka,

Thank you answering my comments.

On SLide4: please mention what is "a_pi D" ?

Besides, I don't have any further comment. I sign off.
Enjoy the workshop!

Best
Nihar


On 2023-11-03 06:32, Roy Chowdhury Priyanka (DOKT) wrote:
> Hi Nihar,
>
> Thanks a lot for your thoughtful comments and suggestions. Apologize
> for my delay in responding. I have gone through the reference papers a
> couple of times and modified the slides (4, 5) in order to address
> your questions. Please find my updated slides here
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/WPCF_Priyanka_V5.pdf
> [1].
> Also, please find my answers below.
>
>        * "It seems the left pi-D plot shows no correlation. Is not
>
> it? Unlike p-D. Make a point here if that is correct" -> You are
> correct, for both plots, the level of correlation signal is very poor.
> The main message from the two observations is that the estimated value
> of FSI parameters suggests chances of D meson re-scattering in the
> hadronic phase are very low.   *
> "Resonance effect fade out…" -> Where do you get this statement?
> Please explain or provide a reference. --> I have added a brief
> explanation but the main takeover from this slide (5) are bullet no. 2
> and 4
>        *
> "If you want to discuss sys. Uncertainty here, then mention also %sys
> uncertainty for case-1" ---> My plan is to mention that slide 11
> refers to the D0 signal purity
>
>        *
> "STAR data shows no correlations, but the data is also consistent with
> theoretical models…" -> It sounds self-contradictory. I would
> prefer to say "Due to large uncertainty, STAR data inconclusive to pin
>
> down the source size" ------> I couldn't find any better way to
> rephrase the statement and I have kept it the same as it was on the QM
> poster.        *
> The last bullet on the summary slides mentions the future plan because
> in the abstract we mention D0-charged hadron femtoscopy and now I have
> changed it to only D0-K, so maybe there would be a question about
> other hadrons
>
>  Regards,
>  Priyanka
>
> -------------------------
>
> From: Nihar Sahoo <nihar AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2023 4:23 AM
> To: STAR HardProbes PWG <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
> Cc: Roy Chowdhury Priyanka (DOKT)
> <priyanka.roy_chowdhury.dokt AT pw.edu.pl>; webmaster AT star.bnl.gov
> <webmaster AT star.bnl.gov>
> Subject: Re: [Star-hp-l] STAR presentation by Priyanka Roy Chowdhury
> for WPCF 2023 submitted for review
>
> Hello Priyanka,
>
> Please find my comments on your nice presentation slides below.
>
> Slide4:
>
> _"Figure 2: Correlation between unlike…at ALICE" -> Remove it.
> _ Can you please mention individually what physics we observed from
> both
> these two figures? It seems left pi-D plot shows no correlation. Is
> not
> it? Unlike p-D. Make a point here if that is correct.
>
> Slide5:
> _ "Figure 3: …" ->Remove this [Generally in presentation we do not
> use
> this]
> _   Don't use "Fig 3 (a)" "(a)" or (b)" ; better mention what
> correlation you point to
> _  "Resonance effect fade out…" -> where do you get this statement?
> Please explain or provide reference.
>
> Slide6,7,8
> _"Figure 5?: …" ->Remove it
>
> Slide16:
> If you want to discuss sys. Uncertainty here, then mention also %sys
> uncertainty for case-1
>
> Slide17:
> _"STAR data shows no correlations, but the data also consistent with
> theoretical models…" -> It sounds like self contradictory. I would
> prefer to say "Due to large uncertainty, STAR data inconclusive to pin
> down the source size"
>   Or similar.
> _Late bullet -> not sure if we need it here.
>
> Best
> Nihar
>
> On 2023-10-31 04:01, Roy Chowdhury Priyanka (DOKT) via Star-hp-l
> wrote:
>> Dear convenors,
>>
>>  I am not sure if my previous email was received, therefore, to
> avoid
>> confusion, I am sharing the link of my updated version of the slides
>> here once again.
>> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/WPCF_Priyanka_V3.pdf
> [2]
>> I made the changes after a discussion with local STAR group at WUT
> and
>> I have removed previous version.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Priyanka
>>
>> -------------------------
>>
>> From: Star-hp-l <star-hp-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov> on behalf of
>> webmaster--- via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
>> Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2023 1:36 PM
>> To: Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov <Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
>> Cc: webmaster AT star.bnl.gov <webmaster AT star.bnl.gov>
>> Subject: [Star-hp-l] STAR presentation by Priyanka Roy Chowdhury for
>> WPCF 2023 submitted for review
>>
>> Dear Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
>>
>> Priyanka Roy Chowdhury (priyanka.roy_chowdhury.dokt AT pw.edu.pl) has
>> submitted
>> a material for a review, please have a look:
>> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/65747 [3]
>>
>> Deadline: 2023-11-06
>> ---
>> 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 [4]
>> _______________________________________________
>> Star-hp-l mailing list
>> Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
>> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l [4]
>
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1] https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/WPCF_Priyanka_V5.pdf
> [2] https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/WPCF_Priyanka_V3.pdf
> [3] https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/65747
> [4] https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l