STAR HardProbes PWG

[Andrew Tamis <andrew.tamis AT yale.edu>]

Hello Nihar,

Thank you for the helpful comments.  For point 2) I am referring to the measurement of charge-energy correlators, which will be new for this talk.  I have previously referred to these as "charge-selected" or "charge-separated" correlators, such as in the paper, which is appropriate for two-point correlators, but "charge-weighted" is intended to be more general: as this observable is defined by an additional charge weighting in the energy weight definition (i.e. EQEQ/pT^2 for two-point and EQEQEQ/pT^3 for three-point).  Let me know if this terminology is appropriate.  I think updating this in the paper for consistency might be appropriate as well.

Best,

Andrew

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 7:50 AM Nihar Sahoo <nihar AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov> wrote:

Hello Andrew,

Thank you for your nice abstract.
Please find my comment below.

1) please include "For the STAR collaboration"
2)"Charge-Energy" and "charge-weighted ENCs" -> I think you refer to
charged particles' energy correlations.
If yes, I think something can be improved in the wordings.
Otherwise, it sounds like "charge-energy correlation"

Besides, It seems like we are going to introduce a different name
"Charge-Energy" Correlators comparing with the EEC paper draft.
Can we make it consistent? And this "charge" is a technical details
(selecting charged particles for correlator) that can be included in the
text.

Best
Nihar


On 2024-05-14 03:09, Andrew Tamis via Star-hp-l wrote:
> Will upload to drupal, but sending here for now as it seems to be
> facing some slow-down
>
> Best,
> Andrew
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 5:37 PM Andrew Tamis <andrew.tamis AT yale.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Isaac,
>>
>> Thank you very much for the comments, I have implemented them,
>> please let me know if the point of "close to the massive case" has
>> been made clear.  I have split it into two sentences now beginning
>> at the end of line 14, as I believe it is a truly important point
>> about the unique capabilities of STAR for this measurement.  I have
>> saved space by merging the two sentences of paragraph one into one,
>> so let me know if this reads well as well.
>>
>> Additionally, I have reworked the title, so feedback would be
>> appreciated on that as well.
>>
>> Best,
>> Andrew
>>
>> On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 2:56 PM Mooney, Isaac via Star-hp-l
>> <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> Here are a few more small comments along with a replication of the
>> comments I just gave you offline in your office so there is a
>> record.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Isaac
>>
>> Sentence 1: You did a great job making the abstract general to the
>> N-point correlator for any N, but we discussed here removing
>> “projected” and moving it to the first sentence of paragraph 2
>> because this sentence is valid for projected or non-projected
>> correlators whereas you measure specifically the projected one.
>> Sentence 2: “approximately separates”
>> Sentence 3: “at which hadron groups with different charge
>> compositions” or similar
>> Paragraph 2, sentence 1: “We will present”
>> Sentence 3: “at RHIC energies compared to LHC energies”
>> : Please revise to make “close to the massive case” and
>> “observation of the non-perturbative effects of …” more clear
>> especially for a reader not familiar with EECs.
>> Last sentence: “are presented”.
>>
>> On May 13, 2024, at 02:14, Yi Yang via Star-hp-l
>> <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> Thanks a lot. I don't have any further comments.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Yi
>>
>> On Thu, May 9, 2024 at 11:32 PM Andrew Tamis via Star-hp-l
>> <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Yi,
>>
>> Thank you very much for the suggestion, i have implimented it.
>>
>> Best,
>> Andrew
>>
>> On Wed, May 8, 2024 at 10:03 PM Yi Yang via Star-hp-l
>> <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> Thanks a lot for the well-written abstract.
>> I only have one minor suggestion for your consideration.
>> - at STAR sqrt(s) --> at STAR collision energies
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Yi
>>
>> On Wed, May 8, 2024 at 1:27 AM webmaster--- via Star-hp-l
>> <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>> Dear Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
>>
>> Andrew Tamis (andrew.tamis AT yale.edu) has submitted a material for a
>> review,
>> please have a look:
>> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/67701
>>
>> Deadline: 2024-05-25
>> ---
>> 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
>
>  _______________________________________________
> 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