STAR HardProbes PWG

[Barbara Trzeciak <barbara.trzeciak AT gmail.com>]

Sounds good now, yes, that was the confusion.

Cheers,

Barbara

On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 10:59 AM Nihar Sahoo <nihar AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov> wrote:

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$