Next Article in Journal / Special Issue
Nuclear Physics at the Energy Frontier: Recent Heavy Ion Results from the Perspective of the Electron Ion Collider
Previous Article in Journal
δ Gravity: Dark Sector, Post-Newtonian Limit and Schwarzschild Solution
Previous Article in Special Issue
Bose–Einstein Correlations in pp and pPb Collisions at LHCb
Open AccessCommunication
Peer-Review Record

Study of Angular Correlations in Monte Carlo Simulations in Pb-Pb Collisions

Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Received: 30 March 2019 / Revised: 22 April 2019 / Accepted: 24 April 2019 / Published: 28 April 2019

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. The title is slightly misleading, claiming a general study of angular correlation in Monte-Carlo simulations. I suggest to add "n high energy AA collisions" to the end.


2. In the first sentence of introduction there is a scale mismatches between Q^2 and \Lambda_QCD


3. The citation [2] to jet quenching is rather old, there are a lot of progress in the field since that paper. Please update the reference.


4. Second paragraph of the introduction: does AMPT also reproduce the asymmetry? please comment.


5. After Eq.(1) the normalization of M(\Delta\phi,\Delta\eta) is not correct, \alpha=1/M(0,0) should be the correct one.


6. Fig.1. (left): the text claimes that S(\Delta\phi,\Delta\eta) is displayed. IS it trivially the same, as the label quotes? Please correct / comment.


7. Text after (3) (flow) has absolutely no connection with the rest of the paper. Please leave it out, or add a connection.


8. Fig. 4. please add to the caption, the ALICE is [email protected] TeV. For ALICE members it may be trivial, but not fot the reader.


9. Summary / Conclusion: PYTHIA does not have jet quenching contrary to AMPT, this also may be a reason for the differences seen between PYTHIA and AMPT.


Author Response

Comment 1
Response 1.: So this was the title of my talk at the Zimanyi Workshop, but now I've changed the title.
Comment 2:

Yes, it was a mistake, I changed it.

Comment 3.
The citation is updated
Comment 4.
As the figures show there is an asymmetry between the $\Delta \eta$ and $\Delta \varphi$ side

Comment 5.
Another mistake and I changed it.

Comment 6.
I don't really understand what are you suggested in this comment.
Comment 7.
Long-range correlations can be interpreted as a background for the jet-peak in the fit, so it is necessary to fit. I put one more sentence to connect more to the other part of the article
Comment 8,9:
I added the follwong details

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors report on studies of angular correlations and in particular their attempt to characterise the peak shape using various Monte Carlo generators. The contribution is well written and contains interesting information. I suggest to publish it, provided that the author considers and addresses the comments and suggestions below.



Physics comments
One of the main results reported in this contribution is summarised in fig. 3. The authors claim that one can see a particle species dependence of the widths in Pythia/Angantyr however this is really difficult to asses considering the amount of different data points each pT bin has. Since the authors say nothing about the centrality dependence of the data points, I suggest to keep one centrality in this plot and make the [point they would like to make clearer.


Editorial comments

Line 14: In heavy-ion collisions where the typical… ==> In heavy-ion collisions, for processes where the typical
Line 14: Change Q2 to Q otherwise even the units do not match
Line 16: …exist freely at low energies [1]. For this reason they eventually… ==> …exist freely [1] and they eventually…
Line 17: …and they propagate… ==> …and propagate…
Line 19: …dense medium. Jets lose… ==> …dense medium and lose…
Line 21: …be used to study the generated medium. ==> …be used to study the properties of the medium.
Lines 21-23: I would remove the last line of the first paragraph
Line 26: Remove the first GeV/c after 1
Line 27: explain what you mean with the term “high centrality” (i.e. central or peripheral?; I know what you mean but it can be misinterpreted) and change the “asymmetrical” to “asymmetric”
Line 46: no indent
Line 50: There is no particle with the symbol Λ0 but only Λ
Line 57: …function (Eq. 2). ==> …function of the form of Eq. 2

Equation 2: define/describe below what γ, ω and Γ are

Lines 62 and 63: I would change the term “azimuthal flow” to “anisotropic flow”
Lines 69-71: I would change these lines in a way that reads “…2.76TeV. The former is based on the Fritiof model…”
Kine 87: Remove the spurious “.” after AMPT

Author Response

Physics comments:
One of the main results reported in this contribution is summarised in fig. 3. The authors claim that one can see a particle species dependence of the widths in Pythia/Angantyr however this is really difficult to asses considering the amount of different data points each pT bin has. Since the authors say nothing about the centrality dependence of the data points, I suggest to keep one centrality in this plot and make the [point they would like to make clearer

Response:
It is an understandable proposal and I've changed these particular figures. Thank you.

Editorial comments:

Line 14: In heavy-ion collisions where the typical… ==> In heavy-ion collisions, for processes where the typical
Line 14: Change Q2 to Q otherwise even the units do not match
Line 16: …exist freely at low energies [1]. For this reason they eventually… ==> …exist freely [1] and they eventually…
Line 17: …and they propagate… ==> …and propagate…
Line 19: …dense medium. Jets lose… ==> …dense medium and lose…
Line 21: …be used to study the generated medium. ==> …be used to study the properties of the medium.
Lines 21-23: I would remove the last line of the first paragraph
Line 26: Remove the first GeV/c after 1
Line 27: explain what you mean with the term “high centrality” (i.e. central or peripheral?; I know what you mean but it can be misinterpreted) and change the “asymmetrical” to “asymmetric”
Line 46: no indent
Line 50: There is no particle with the symbol Λ0 but only Λ
Line 57: …function (Eq. 2). ==> …function of the form of Eq. 2

Equation 2: define/describe below what γ, ω and Γ are

Lines 62 and 63: I would change the term “azimuthal flow” to “anisotropic flow”
Lines 69-71: I would change these lines in a way that reads “…2.76TeV. The former is based on the Fritiof model…”
Kine 87: Remove the spurious “.” after AMPT

Response:
All of the comments are considered and changed


Universe, EISSN 2218-1997, Published by MDPI AG
Back to TopTop