From: Stephen J. Sanders (ssanders@ku.edu)
Date: Mon Jun 23 2003 - 11:42:24 EDT
Hi, In reading through the draft I'm struck by how unfortunate it is that we don't have centrality selection for the dAu. There would seem to be two "features" of the reaction that we are unable to address: 1.) Does the shape of the nuclear modification function change with centrality, as seen with the Au+Au data, 2.) Does the amplitude of the hard scattering region of the nuclear modification function change with centrality, as seen dramatically by Phenix, but seemingly less so by Phobos and Star. We can't answer the second without real centrality selection and an analysis of Ncol. However, I wonder if it would be worthwhile to address 1.) by adding a central/peripheral ratio vs Pt. I could imagine a comparison on the 50% highest tile multiplicity with the 50% lowest. Just a thought... Question 2.) is probably much more interesting, but is looking increasingly unlikely to be ready by the time we need to submit.... ...steve > >> >> Dear Collaborators, >> >> I've updated the high pt paper draft. The changes are mainly of >> the language (thanks to J. Natowitz). I've added a bit and re-arranged >> the analysis and hardware section. Don't focus too much on the text >> describing the figures since this will be re-writtin when we have the >> final figures. >> >> The new draft is here: >> >> www.nbi.dk/~ekman/highpt/high-pt26.ps >> www.nbi.dk/~ekman/highpt/high-pt26.pdf >> www.nbi.dk/~ekman/highpt/high-pt26.tex >> >> Claus >> >> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jun 23 2003 - 11:43:50 EDT