Re: high pt paper.

From: Trine S. Tveter (trine@lynx.uio.no)
Date: Thu Jun 26 2003 - 06:39:59 EDT

  • Next message: Ian Bearden: "Progress report"
    Dear all,
    
    On Wed, 25 Jun 2003, Jens Jørgen Gaardhøje wrote:
    
    > Enclosed please find an updated version of the high pt paper draft.
    
    > Claus has worked hard at a reanalysis and along the way we have changed the 
    > figure strategy to focus more on the rapidity dependence, which is the BRAHMS 
    > specialty. At the same time we focus more on the relative changes between 
    > spectra and ratios. This should make us more independent of the p+p 'reference' 
    > and of various systematic errors.
    
    I think the draft has really gained from the stronger focus on our unique
    rapidity dependence and the emphasis on differential behaviour (R_CPs and 
    ratios of R_CP between different rapidities, which are independent of 
    our somewhat dubious "reference" spectrum.)
    
    > We have been debating whether to show all 4 centrality cuts or just 2 as in 
    > here. Opinions?
    
    It would have been interesting at least as a basis for discussion to see all 4
    centrality cuts.  It would also strengthen the statistical material.  The evidence 
    for stronger suppression at eta~2 is based on 3 points with large error bars
    (Figure 3.)  I'm curious whether "R_CP"s utilizing more centrality bins would
    confirm this trend - maybe one could use the central spectrum as reference since
    it has smaller error bars, and compare also R(0-10/20-40) and R(0-10/10-20)
    for the two rapidities?   
    
    Is it possible at all to extract spectra for centralities in the region
    60 - 100%?
    
    > Claus hopes to be able to post a web page with details of the analysis later.
    
    > We have had various input (ZBY, JN, MM, KH etc..). Not all has been included 
    > yet into the manuscript. Not because of lack of good will but because of lack of time. 
    
    > Hope your comments will continue flowing. They are necessary if we are to 
    > attempt  a submission not too far behind the other 3 experiments. 
    > All sorts of comments are greatly appreciated. Particularly those that also 
    > concretely suggest a solution to a given problem.
    
    The effect of momentum resolution might be a little different in MRS and FS,
    which would affect the R_AAs slightly.  (It would of course not affect the 
    R_CPs :-))  The spectra could easily be corrected for this effect, to the 
    extent we know the parameters of our Gaussian smearing.  I believe the 
    corrected spectra would be relatively softer at eta~2.
    
    > In particular we request your opinion about whether this approach (text and 
    > figures) is suitable. If the general idea is acceptable by a majority, the next 
    > job is to improve the quality of the draft, of figure appearance etc,  while 
    > continuing analysis checks. Parallel processing is necessary.
    
    The general idea is fine in my opinion  :-) 
    
                                                 Cheers,  Trine
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jun 26 2003 - 07:10:59 EDT