star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov

Subject: STAR HardProbes PWG

List archive

Re: [Star-hp-l] [Star-talks-l] STAR presentation by Nihar Sahoo for QWG 2024 submitted for review

From: Nihar Sahoo <nihar AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>
To: Barbara Trzeciak <barbara.trzeciak AT gmail.com>
Cc: Yi Yang <yiyang0429 AT gmail.com>, STAR HardProbes PWG <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Subject: Re: [Star-hp-l] [Star-talks-l] STAR presentation by Nihar Sahoo for QWG 2024 submitted for review
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 15:29:21 +0530

Hello Barbara,

Yes, that is correct way to say and that is what I mean.
I think "p+Au vs. Au+Au" makes the confusion. I will remove that sentence, instead use the following,

"pAu data help to quantify the CNM effect in AuAu collisions."

Let me know what do you think.

Best
Nihar

On 2024-02-23 15:10, Barbara Trzeciak wrote:

Hi Nihar,

I think the theory CNM models compare to pA data, so what we need are
precise data in these small systems.
Then the CNM effects can be factorized (at least most of them at
mid-rapidity) to quantify the CNM effects in AA collisions, and
distatagle in this way the hot medium effects.

Cheers,
Barbara

On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 10:33 AM Nihar Sahoo
<nihar AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hello Barbara,

What I mean here that to have better model of the CNM effects,
Theorist
need a comparison between pAu and Au+Au collisions.
Please see summary of our STAR paper
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2110.09666.pdf [1]
"... to quantify the CNM effects experienced by the J/ψ meson in
p+Au
collisions."

Best
Nihar

On 2024-02-23 13:44, Barbara Trzeciak wrote:

Hi Nihar,

thanks, I have one more question:
- s7: "p+Au vs. Au+Au: Comparison helps to quantify the CNM

effect" -

I don't think I understand how we quantify CNM effects by the
comparison ?

Cheers,
Barbara

On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 8:36 AM Yi Yang <yiyang0429 AT gmail.com>
wrote:

Hi Nihar.

I don't have any further comments, thanks a lot.

Cheers,
Yi

On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 1:20 PM Nihar Sahoo
<nihar AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hello Barbara and Yi,

Thank you for your fine tuning comments and suggestions. I have
implemented those.

https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/presentations/QWG-2024/Recent-heavy-flavor-results-heavy-ion-collisions-STAR

Barbara's following comment:

s6: I would remove this slide and add the new polarization

results,

I know you and Rongrong suggested me to include new Jpsi
polarization
results, but I find my self a bit uncomfortable to include that
result
and also time constraint to explain the result. So I would

prefer

not
to include. Nasim is presenting pp published results.

Thank you
Nihar

On 2024-02-23 08:39, Yi Yang wrote:

Hi Nihar,

Thanks a lot for the updated version. I agree with Barbara's
additional comments.

Cheers,
Yi

On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 6:33 PM Nihar Sahoo

<nihar AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>

wrote:

Hello Yi,

Thank you for your comments. I have implemented all your

comments

and
modified my slides a bit in version-2.

https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/presentations/QWG-2024/Recent-heavy-flavor-results-heavy-ion-collisions-STAR

Please have a look.

Thank you
Nihar

On 2024-02-22 08:50, Yi Yang wrote:

Hi Nihar,

Thanks a lot for the nice slides.
I have some minor suggestions on v1 for your consideration.
- page 2: baryon density QCD medium --> baryon density in QCD

medium

I would indicate ccbar is J/psi and bbbar is

Upsilon

(probably everyone knows that)
- page 6: The reference should be "Phys. Lett. B797 (2019)

134917"

(the one you put is for RpAu)
- page 8: Probably you can also consider to show

Ziyue/Te-Chuan's

new

results here since it still slightly improves the statistics

in

high

pT.
- page 10: I would show the Psi(2S) signal (mass plot)

instead

of

the

thermometer on the right, but just a suggestion.
- page 15 and 16: It would be good to indicate 200 GeV

collision

energy

I understand you only have 15 mins, but I would think adding

Upsilon

in isobar and J/psi at very low pT would be good in the talk.

Cheers,
Yi

On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 1:12 AM Nihar Sahoo via Star-hp-l
<star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hello Barbara and Rongrong,

Thank you two for your nice comments.
Based on your comments and suggestion, I modified and

restructured

my
presentation.
This is a 15min presentation; a few topics I do not add due

to

time

constraint.

https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/presentations/QWG-2024/Recent-heavy-flavor-results-heavy-ion-collisions-STAR

Please have a look.

Thank you
Nihar

On 2024-02-21 03:51, Barbara Trzeciak wrote:

Hi Nihar,

Please find below a few comments from my side.

- Add references to the published results
- s2: Following up on Rongrong's comment, I would even

remove

the

thermometer picture from there. We know it's a very

simplified

picture, and I don't think it's needed for this expert

audience.

By the QGP thermalization I guess you mean the QGP

temperature.

But

again, one needs to be careful here, it's not only the

static

Debye

screening but the dynamical processes play a role.
And instead of the heavy flavor motivation that you have

now,

you

can

say here that there are different process that influence

quarkonium

production: dissociation (both static and dynamical),

regeneration

+

cold nuclear matter effects
- s9: remove "Smaller charm production rate at RHIC"
- s10: Title: I guess you want to emphasise here isobar

collision

results - I would change the title. The Au+Au results you

either

show

on the previous slides or are already old.
And I would add here (or add a slide before this one)

motivating

studies in smaller isobar collisions, e.g.: study

dependence

of

hot

nuclear medium effects on medium size and energy density.
And I would use here a simpler plot that we have, without

the

LHC

data.
- s10: "or/and charm flow in QGP at RHIC" - you mean no or

small

flow

?
- s11: I would suggest adding the J/psi polarization in

isobar

collisions. If you don't have time, I think it might be

more

interesting in this workshop than the rho00 result.
- s12: suppression in heavy-ion collisions- > sequential

suppression

in heavy-ion collisions at RHIC
- s12: remove "Confirms QGP thermalization and Debye

screening

in

QGP", I suggest "QGP thermal properties"
- I'm not sure what you want to say with the second bullet,

it's

quite

generic statement

Cheers,
Barbara

On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 10:19 PM Ma, Rongrong via

Star-hp-l

<star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hello Nihar

Thanks for updating your slides. I have few more comments

for

your

consideration:

Slide 1: change the title to "Recent quarkonium results in

..."

Slide 2:
- here you show the thermometer picture and mention "

Debye

screening". However, you do not really explain what they

are.

The

second bullet reads more like an open HF introduction.
- Given the realization of imaginary part of the

potential,

I

think

it is better to say dissociation in general, which

includes

both

static ("Debye screening") and dynamic processes. At

least,

you

should mention dynamical dissociation along with Debye

screening.

- Throughout the presentation, you mention a few times

about

"QGP

thermalization". Could you elaborate how one connects

quarkonium

suppression with QGP thermalization?
- For Nasim's talk, I think it is better to be titled

"quarkonia

in

p+p"
- I think QGP usually stands for Quark-Gluon Plasma

Slide 3:
- since you do not show any open HF results, I do not

think

you

need

the HFT picture
- Forward Silicon Track -> FST
- Forward EMCal and HCal -> FCS

Slide 8
- This slide reads like an introduction slide for

quarkonia,

which

should be moved to slide 2?
- charm quark dissociation -> quarkonia dissociation

Slide 9: I feel this slide should go together with slide 4

which

also discusses about energy dependence

Slide 10: it is not clear what you want to say about the

left

figure. The energy dependence has been discussed earlier.

If

you

want to focus on the system size dependence, I have a

version

of

the

figure with only 200 GeV collision systems:

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

Also it is probably better to split this slide into two.

Slide 11: our vector meson spin alignment paper concluded

that

the

QGP's global angular momentum, as observed in Lambda

polarization,

actually contributes very little to the observed vector

meson

spin

alignment. One possible origin is the strong force field,

which

applies to phi meson and should also apply to Jpsi. This

is

a

main

motivation to measure Jpsi spin alignment, I think.

Best
Rongrong

On Feb 17, 2024, at 1:50 PM, Nihar Sahoo

<nihar AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>

wrote:

Hello Rongrong,

Yes, you are correct. I was diverted a bit from the theme

of

this

workshop.
Ok, I corrected those with a discussion of J/psi RAA and

v2

from

Isobar.

https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/presentations/QWG-2024/Recent-heavy-flavor-results-heavy-ion-collisions-STAR

Please have a look.

Thank you
Nihar

On 2024-02-16 22:14, Ma, Rongrong wrote:
Hello Nihar
The invitation is intended for presenting recent

quarkonium

results

in
heavy-ion collisions at STAR since it is a quarkonium

workshop.

So,

I
think it is probably not so relevant to present open HF

results

(slides 9-11). Instead, you can consider talking about

Jpsi

and

Upsilon Raa, Jpsi v2, Jpsi polarization in Isobar, for

example.

Thanks.
Best
Rongrong
On Feb 14, 2024, at 5:33 AM, Nihar Sahoo via Star-hp-l
<Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
Hello HP-pwg,
This is an invited talk from startalk to present at

QWG2024

at

Mohali, India, on "Recent heavy flavor results in heavy

ion

collisions at STAR".
It would be great to have comment/feedback from hp-pwg.

Please

have

a look.
Thank you
Nihar
On 2024-02-14 15:57, webmaster--- via Star-talks-l wrote:
Dear star-talks-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
Nihar Sahoo (nihar AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov) has submitted a

material

for

a

review,
please have a look:
https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/66782
Deadline: 2024-02-26
---
If you have any problems with the review process, please

contact

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

Links:
------
[1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://arxiv.org/pdf/2110.09666.pdf__;!!P4SdNyxKAPE!EJfrInMeD1SK8gxBDi0zcozzKgUPn_GUi4buGgNggpxynAUCxZh0czYiiXAMj9XI76zlqQ_iow8FTfdYXjOOLmtlaeU-p8g$

Re: [Star-hp-l] [Star-talks-l] STAR presentation by Nihar Sahoo for QWG 2024 submitted for review , (continued)