STAR HardProbes PWG

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

Hello Sooraj,

Thank you for this interesting measurement and slides.
Please find my comments below.

 “STAR Preliminary” needs to be included in all plots.

Slide3:
You need to define what is  “v1”? Formula/expression.
_ Alternate observable - energy loss measurements without need for p+p 
-> This is not needed. Although I understand what do you mean because 
unlike R_AA/I_AA. It doesn’t tell about the amount of energy loss. Jet 
v1 is sensitive to path length dependence of energy loss but it can not 
measure energy loss as it is done in R_AA/I_AA. So in this context I 
would prefer to drop this.

_need to introduce what is v1 and v2?


Slide4:
_ I hope you will update the right cartoon that we made recently
_ “Asymmetry along impact parameter direction at finite rapidity” -> 
This is not clear to me. I think you mean to say here, “asymmetries in 
participant nucleons motion along the impact parameter axis within 
finite rapidity”

_”Creates difference in path length for hard produced partons at finite 
rapidity” -> By adding new cartoon, you can rephrase this as “Creates 
difference in path length for hard produced partons at forward and 
backward direction”

Slide5:
_Taking the same dependence for differential production in x and y, -> 
for outsider, it is not clear what are x and y ? Please mention it.

Slide7:
Glauber + Theory -> Please mention what is “Theory” ?
I think, you can combine Slide6 and 7 to make a message that “asymmetry 
of participants along b direction”


Slide8,9:
You can consider to combine these two slides.
And also if you can add that AMPT simulation plot with zero-v1 for 
binary profile and non-zero v1 from bulk that would be clear message.

Slide10:
“hard-soft asymmetry” -> Please mention what is “hard-soft asymmetry”
Define PL (path length ) before
_ “Can directly access Parton energy loss” -> This is not a correct 
question to impose. Rather I would say “Is jet v1 sensitive to the path 
length dependence of Parton energy loss?
Becasue as I mentioned before we are not measuring energy loss.


Slide11:
I think it would be better to discuss EPD and ZDC detectors and how do 
you use those detectors to calculate 1st Order event plane angle 
compromising 1-2 introductory slides

Slide12:
_ Before this slide, I think you need to discuss how do you select jet 
in this measurement. How do you mitigate combinatoric jet using pT^lead 
cut?
_ You need to mention somewhere this slide, that “AuAu 200 GeV 
(2014+2016) data” or similar
_ Need to mention “p_{T,jet}^{reco}” in stead of pT,jet; and you need to 
define “p_{T,jet}^{reco} = pT,jet - rho*A.”

Slide13: You can keep this slide in backup

Slide14:
_ Need to change x-axis title to “p_{T,jet}^{reco}”
_ Need to mention that are those purple tick markers are. (Bin size of 
“p_{T,jet}^{reco}”)
_ Please include what are the sources contributing to this systematic 
uncertainty.
_ R dependence -> jet R dependence

Slide16:
_ Please cite this proceedings https://arxiv.org/pdf/2008.08789 for 
bottom right figure

Slide17:
Please keep Au+Au and Isobar data (from slide14) side-by side to make a 
statement “isobar collisions consistent with Au+Au within uncertainties”
Slide18:
I think you don’t need to a dedicated slide for an outlook, you can have 
just one sentence at the end.


Best
Nihar


On 2024-09-11 20:32, webmaster AT star.bnl.gov wrote:
> Dear Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
>
> Sooraj Radhakrishnan (skradhakrishnan AT lbl.gov) has submitted a material 
> for a
> review, please have a look:
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/68896
>
> Deadline: 2024-09-22
> ---
> If you have any problems with the review process, please contact
> webmaster AT www.star.bnl.gov