Limiting Fragmentation and Centrality (RE: multiplicity paper - draft02)

Hi, Steve,

I have a comment on the limiting fragmentation argument
in the paper.

If we look at Fig.3 c), the ratio of 0-30%/30-60% is
~1.7 at eta~-4 and ~1 at eta~4. The ratio of Npart for
0-30%/30-60% is (13.5/8.3)~1.6. If we argue that the 
min-bias data (which is very similar as 30-60%) is showing 
a limiting fragmentation-like behavior at the both end
(Au-side and d-side), it's certainly less so for the 
central collision (0-30%) at d-side. For the Au-side,
the argument is still holding up for the central events
since the 0-30%/30-60% is about 1 with Npart scaling, 
but not at the d-side where 0-30%/30-60% is ~0.6 with 
Npart scaling.  Since the main theme of the paper is
"centrality dependence", I think it should be addressed, 
unless we are claiming that we can not tell the difference 
in 40% accuracy.  This might be related with the PHOBOS' 
claiming that "reduction of fragments with centrality", but
nonetheless it will be an interesting observation. 

JH  

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-brahms-l@bnl.gov [mailto:owner-brahms-l@bnl.gov] On Behalf Of
Stephen J. Sanders
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 6:31 PM
To: brahms-l@bnl.gov
Subject: multiplicity paper - draft02


Hi,
A new version of the multiplicity paper is available:

http://kunuc6.phsx.ukans.edu/~sanders/dndeta03.ps
http://kunuc6.phsx.ukans.edu/~sanders/dndeta03.pdf

http://kunuc6.phsx.ukans.edu/~sanders/dndeta03_2col.ps
http://kunuc6.phsx.ukans.edu/~sanders/dndeta03_2col.pdf

The LaTex version and figure macros are on  the piis:
~kansas/dndeta03/dndeta03.tex ~kansas/dndeta03/dndeta03_2col.tex
~kansas/dndeta03/macros/dAuPaperFigures.C (Plot1(),Plot3(),Plot7())/


I ask everyone to give this a careful reading, especially the paper
committee.  Baring any strong complaints, I propose announcing the paper
next Monday, with submission next Thursday.  I will not be available to work
on the paper after next Thursday until the end of December.

What needs to be done:
Hiro is still working on the BB results and he anticipates these could
change by as much as 5%.

Claus' very nice macro for Fig. 3 is running into difficulties.  The figure
looks great in ROOT, but suppressed axis labels reappear in the .eps files.
I don't know how to handle this.  Claus - Any ideas?

References need to be double-checked.

The statistical uncertainties for the BB results are a fabrication...I 
just
assumed 2%.

Regards,
Steve