STAR HardProbes PWG

["Yi Yang" <yiyang429 AT gate.sinica.edu.tw>]

Hi Sooraj,

Thanks a lot for the updated version and explanations. I don't have any further comment on it.

Cheers,

Yi

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yi Yang, Research Fellow
Institute of Physics, Academia Sinica 
E-Mail: yiyang429 AT gate.sinica.edu.tw 
Tel: +886-2-2789-6709
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
-----Original message-----

From:Sooraj Radhakrishnan<skradhakrishnan AT lbl.gov>
To:star-hp-l<star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Date:  Fri, 20 Sep 2024 04:31:25
Subject: Re: [[Star-hp-l] ] STAR presentation by Sooraj Radhakrishnan for HP2024 submitted for review

Hi Yi,

   Thanks for the comments. Please find the updated version at the same location

p.13: I would prefer to keep the color as it is as I am using solid and open markers

//Sorry I missed this part before, could you please remind me how you get the conclusion of "for an estimated initial path length asymmetry of 0.2 fm"?//

--- This is from the AMPT and model calculations. You can see in S17 (current version) that <x> at eta = 1.0 is ~0.2 fm. I have removed these direct comparison to energy loss now as the exact value could depend on other details. This will be followed up in later studies 

thanks,

Sooraj

On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 5:51 AM Nihar Sahoo <nihar AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov> wrote:

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

--

Sooraj Radhakrishnan

Research Scientist,

Department of Physics

Kent State University

Kent, OH 44242

Physicist Postdoctoral Affiliate

Nuclear Science Division
Lawrence Berkeley National Lab
MS70R0319, One Cyclotron Road

Berkeley, CA 94720

Ph: 510-495-2473

Email: skradhakrishnan AT lbl.gov