STAR Protected

D* run14 preliminary QM18

 

Update 05.18.2018 -- Run 9 embedding: Jet Reconstruction Efficiency (R = 0.3, Charged)

We need to know the jet reconstruction efficiency to correct the unfolded measured spectrum, so this is a quick study of the reconstruction efficiency for R = 0.3 charged jets.  There are essenti

Update 05.16.2018 -- Run 9 pp: EtTrg = 9 - 15 GeV Spectrum

Here are the pTcorr spectra for eTtrg = (9, 15) GeV, R = 0.3, charged recoil jets.  The distributions have been normalized by the no. of triggers, eta acceptance, and bin width.

Update 05.16.2018 -- Run 9 pp: R = 0.3 Binning Definition

I've decided on a binning to stick with for the detector recoil jet 'pTcorr' distributions (the 'R = 0.3', charged recoil jet distributions, that is).  The last couple of bins for each trigger ha

First look at EP resolution in 27 GeV Au+Au

A first look at the event-plane resolution for Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV, compared to the same quantities from the Isobar collisions at 200 GeV.

Update 05.14.2018 -- Run 9 Embedding: Response Matrix Check

Yesterday I took my first stab at calculating the response matrix for R = 0.3 charged jets using the Run 9 dijet embedding:

Spin PWG May 14

Update 05.13.2018 -- Run 9 Embedding: Response Matrices

Here is the first stab at the response matrices as calculated using the Run 9 dijet embedding sample.

Update 05.10.2018 -- Run 9 Embedding: Charged Hadron Triggers, Jet Comparisons

Previously, I checked how the track and tower distributions agree between pi0-triggered data (Run 9 L2gamma) and charged hadron-triggered embedding (Run 9 dijet sample):

Dpm Run16 AuAu@200GeV Preliminary Plots

 

Update 05.09.2018 -- Run 9 Embedding: Charged Hadron Triggers, FF Check

Up until now, I've only been using the Reversed Full Field (RFF) configuration of the Run 9 dijet embedding.  The sample was produced with a Full Field (FF) configuration as well, and s

April 2018

STAR Newsletter

April 2018 edition

Update 05.07.2018 -- Run 9 pp: Resolution Study, Final(?) Parameterizations

Since we observe similar behavior in the track resolution between our study and Kolja's, we're ready to move ahead.  See these posts for the comparison between the two studies:

QM 2018 - D0 dAu preliminary results

 

Update 05.06.2018 -- Run 9 pp: Resolution Study (Another Method, Log-Scales)

I forgot to put some of the plots in the post on 05/04/2018 in a log-scale, so here's the momentum resolution as calculated from 'pTmc - pTreco' with proper axes:

Update 05.04.2018 -- Run 9 pp: Resolution Check (Another Method)

We are continuing to try to figure out if the tracking resolution in the Run 9 dijet embedding sample is as expected.  My previous attempts to calculate the resolution seemed to be wrong, so we g

Update 05.04.2018 -- Run 9 pp: Resolution Check (Another Method)

We are continuing to try to figure out if the tracking resolution in the Run 9 dijet embedding sample is as expected.  My previous attempts to calculate the resolution seemed to be wrong, so we g

STAR Preliminary Results Archive

This page collects the preliminary plots approved by STAR. 

QM 2018 - net-Lambda fluctuation measurements - QA/cut selection and final results preliminary figures

NOTE: This page is still under construction .... !!!!


Abstract:

Test

 xxx