1 / 15

STAR-PHENIX Comparison Differences in the f analyses

STAR-PHENIX Comparison Differences in the f analyses. Richard Seto Collected slides from Charlie, dipali etc. pp comparison. p-p @ 200 GeV. dAu min bias comparison. Min Bias. d + Au @ 200 GeV. dAu comparison. dAu. AuAu comparison. Au-Au data. comments. AuAu PP same

zea
Download Presentation

STAR-PHENIX Comparison Differences in the f analyses

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. STAR-PHENIX ComparisonDifferences in the f analyses Richard Seto Collected slides from Charlie, dipali etc

  2. pp comparison p-p @ 200 GeV

  3. dAu min bias comparison Min Bias d + Au @ 200 GeV

  4. dAu comparison dAu

  5. AuAu comparison Au-Au data

  6. comments • AuAu • PP same • AuAu star higher than phenix – all centralities • HENCE • Rcp should be same in both exps – it is • R_AA will be different - phenix suppressed Star not (this is what is seen) • When does hard scattering come in? • dA • pp same • dAu • Central: star slightly higher than phenix. • peripheral- nominal agreement • HENCE • Rcp different in the two experiments with phenix showing suppression • RdA different in two experiments with phenix showing suppression • STAR shows no suppression in both (IS THIS TRUE?) • RdAu phenix is shows “suppression!!!?”

  7. More comments • PHENIX higher than STAR in ALL AU-AU and Central dAu • PHENIX and STAR “agree” in pp and peripheral dAu • PHENIX lower than star on high multiplcity events • Multiplcity dependent problem? • Embedding or efficiency??

  8. dAu

  9. AU-Au Current Status of the Run2 DiscrepancyLooking at the integrated yield numbers dN/dy • Publications from Run2 Au+Au data at 200 GeV • STAR in PL B 612 (April 2005) 181-189 • PHENIX in PR C 72 (July 2005) 014903 • One common centrality bin and minimum bias datacan be directly compared using exponential fitting Run2 discrepancy factors for dN/dy 1.69 +/- 0.27 (0 - 10% centrality) 1.79 +/- 0.13 (minimum bias) statisticalerrors only

  10. Update from QM’05 Presentations • Both STAR and PHENIX presented Run4 yield results • Both stated that their Run4 results agreed with their Run2 resultsBy inference the integrated yield discrepancy persists for Run4 • Questions were asked about the STAR-PHENIX discrepancyObvious interest in getting this discrepancy resolved • STAR had a back-up slide not shown quoting a Rafelski et al. preprintwhich questioned the lowest PHENIX mT data point in 0-10% centrality(that back-up slide will be shown later in this presentation) • STAR and PHENIX presented the first v2 results for the f • STAR’s result tended to be higher than PHENIX’s result but the error bars are too large to conclude that there is a discrepancy • The yield discrepancy may diminish the credence of the v2 quotes ? • PHENIX declined to show RdAu results for the f • STAR declined to show Run4 RAA results for the f but PHENIX did show Run4 RAA results claiming f suppression • In its Run2 paper STAR had shown an absence of suppression for the f

  11. RAA and RCP From Run2 STAR (PLB figure) STAR sees almost the same RCP ~0.5 for the f as PHENIX in the Run2 data STAR sees no RAA suppression for the f in the 0-5% centrality bin from Run2 for the pT range 1.5 to 3.4 GeV/c STAR sees RAA ~1.5 enhancement for the f in the 60-80% centrality bin for the pT range 1.5 to 3.4 GeV/c

  12. RAA and RCP from Run4 PHENIX(QM’05 prelim figures) PHENIX claims RAA ~0.4 suppression for the f in the 0-10% centrality bin for the pT range 1.5 to 2.1 GeV/c comparable to effect seen in the p0Suppression decreases in the 60-90% bin, again comparable to the p0 RCP for the f comparable to what STAR has published for Run2

  13. 2 . 5 R d A u R ( 6 0 ~ 8 0 / p p ) 2 . 0 A A R ( 0 5 / p p ) A A Ratio 1 . 5 1 . 0 0 . 5 S T A R P r e l i m i n a r y 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 5 1 . 0 1 . 5 2 . 0 2 . 5 3 . 0 3 . 5 4 . 0 2 P ( G e V / c ) PHENIX Preliminary: Talk by D. Pal T Update on fRCP STAR Preliminary Talk by Xiangzhou Cai The  RCP is well below proton or lambda RCP. Consistent with NCQ scaling expectations. a discrepancy arises between PHENIX and STAR RAA (RAA ≠ RCP)

  14. Question about RdAu for the f in PHENIX Values appear to be systematically low?

  15. Unshown STAR Backup Slide from QM’05(but it shows what they are thinking) Johann Rafelski etc. nucl-th/0412072 Rafelski et al. conjecture that the lowest PHENIX mT data point is a factor of 1.5 too low and this drives the low dN/dy value for PHENIX. Since STAR has more low mT data, then STAR’s result is more believable 0 - 10% centralitySTAR data 0 - 10% centralityPHENIX data My opinion (see next slide):By using a linear plot Rafelski et al. obscure the difference in normalization at the higher mT points. Rafelski et al. also ignore the minimum bias data discrepancy. 0 - 10% centralitySTAR and PHENIX

More Related