[Clas12_verystrange] review comments - abstract

Tue Apr 24 16:32:27 EDT 2012

Hi,

Below is my attempt at the new abstract.  Let me know what you think,
especially check if I got the numbers right.  Thanks,
Veronique.
--------------------------------------------------------------

We propose to study the production mechanisms of the $S=-2, -3$ baryons
in exclusive photonuclear reactions with the CLAS12 detector.

The proposed experiment, to be run in parallel with the approved
CLAS12 meson spectroscopy experiment [E12-11-005], is expected to yield total
samples containing $\sim 8000$ $\Omega^-$ ($S=-3)$ and  $\sim 1.182$ million
$\Xi$ ($S=-2)$ baryons after reconstruction, based on predicted cross
sections
and simulated results.

These data would provide the statistics necessary to obtain the first
precision
measurement of the $\Omega^-$ differential cross section in the reaction
$\gamma p \rightarrow \Omega^- K^+ K^+ K^0$, and to search for excited
$\Omega^-$
states.

This experiment would provide the world's largest sample of cascade baryons
in a photoproduction environment.  Our cascade data sample would be used to
search for new and missing excited $\Xi$ states with the possibility to
measure their quantum numbers, as well as the mass splittings of cascade
doublets, with a factor of 10 increase in precision over the existing PDG
values for the ground state.
In addition, we would extract spin-parity information of the
already-established $\Xi(1690)$ and $\Xi(1820)$ from a double-moment
analysis.
These $\Xi$ data samples would also provide the statistics necessary for
measuring, for the first time, the beam polarization transfer and
induced polarization of the ground state $\Xi^-$ in the reaction
$\gamma p \rightarrow \Xi^- K^+K^-$.

---------------------------------------------------------------

> Hi, Igor,
>
> Looks like we have some work to do.
>
> Below is the comments from the reviewer. My jlab account is suspended. I
> don't know if our mailing list accepts my fiu email. If not, could you
> forward this out?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Lei
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: Keith Griffioen <griff at jlab.org<mailto:griff at jlab.org>>
> Date: April 24, 2012 6:01:46 AM EDT
> To: "Hicks, Kenneth" <hicks at ohio.edu<mailto:hicks at ohio.edu>>
> Cc: Keith Griffioen <griff at jlab.org<mailto:griff at jlab.org>>, "Marco
> Battaglieri (battaglieri at ge.infn.it<mailto:battaglieri at ge.infn.it>)"
> <battaglieri at ge.infn.it<mailto:battaglieri at ge.infn.it>>, "Lei Guo
> (lguo at jlab.org<mailto:lguo at jlab.org>)"
> <lguo at jlab.org<mailto:lguo at jlab.org>>
> Subject: Re: proposal
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> Here are some comments on the proposal,  "Photoproduction of the Very
> Strangest Baryons on the Proton Target in CLAS12"
>
> Generally, I think the proposed experiment is interesting, relevant and
> doable.  It would be a real shame not to use already allocated beam time
> to study the multiply-strange resonances using CLAS12.
>
> The proposal, however, could use some polishing.  This is important for
> two reasons: 1) the easier it is for the PAC to understand, the better the
> proposal will fare, and 2) the proposal will become a decade-long
> reference for a wide community, so it should be written very well.
>
> I didn't start out to make editorial corrections, but I did note some
> things.  Please see:
> http://www.jlab.org/Hall-B/secure/clas12/griff/Strangest.pdf
>
> The Abstract, Introduction and Physics Motivation were meandering and
> repetitive.  I often felt I was reading certain statements again and
> again.  The proposal would be better served if all of this were tighter,
> more concise, and to the point.
>
> As to the organizational structure, I would eliminate all subsections in
> italics indicated by an arabic numeral.  Roman numeral and Roman lettered
> sections are fine, but the italicized subsections are infrequent,
> sporadic, and consequently confusing.  Then I would make more logical
> divisions:
>
> (subject headings below are just my abbreviations)
> Abstract:  Be more specific and more precise.  What do you plan to
> measure?  How?  With what precision.  Save the "Almost half a century" and
> "unique lens" stuff for the introduction.
> I. Introduction
> II. Physics Motivation
> A. Search for Omega
> B. Missing Cascades
> C. Cascade Polarization
> D. Elastic Scattering
> III. Cross Section Models
> A. VMD
> B. Effective Lag. 1
> C. Effective Lag. 2
> (kill the summary)
> IV. Cross Section Estimates
> A. Xi
> B. Omega
> V. Specialized Detector Components
> A. Forward Tagger
> B. Calorimeter
> C. Hodo
> D. FT-TRACK
> E. Trigger
> F. Status
> VI. CLAS12 Measurement
> A. Omega Production and Final States
> B. Xi production and Final States
> C. Spin and Parity
> V. Beam-Time Request
> (kill the summary)
>
> You go through nice MC simulations and show how you can get virtually
> background-free distributions in Fig. 24.  During the last collaboration
> meeting this point was lost on some of the most knowledgeable physicists
> in the audience.  You need to make sure this doesn't happen with the
> proposal as well.  If there is one figure the PAC is to understand, which
> is it?  I would think Fig. 24, but then you need to make very sure that
> all of your text points to this and makes sure the reader understands it
> perfectly.
>
> I find that the proposal is missing the final step that shows what you
> expect to measure.  You've simulated things well, you've estimated
> production cross sections, etc., but you show no plots with expected error
> bars for any of the things you really want to know.  Where is the plot
> that shows simulated measured data points for Omega photoproduction as a
> function of photon energy?  Where is the equivalent plot for the Cascades?
>  Where is your simulated Fig. 25 (bottom) plot for the resonances you will
>  determine the spin and parity for?  What is the simulation of the plots
> you would put into the PRL article you write after analyzing these data?
> How do your expected results compare to what Hall D might produce?
> Can you put simulated CLAS12 data on Figure 21?  What about on Figure 20?
> Can you put CLAS12 simulated data on Figure 19 as well?  This would show
> how much better 12 GeV is than what was possible with CLAS.
>
> In the end, you have no figures that in one powerpoint slide would
> summarize what you will measure and how it compares to previous knowledge.
>  It would be very helpful for you to have such.
>
>
> Best wishes,
> Keith
>
> ---------------------------------------
> Keith Griffioen
> Professor of Physics
> College of William & Mary
> (757) 221-3537
> griff at physics.wm.edu<mailto:griff at physics.wm.edu>
> ---------------------------------------
>
>
>
> On Apr 10, 2012, at 11:32 AM, Hicks, Kenneth wrote:
>
> Hi Keith and Marco,
>
>
>
> Attached is the proposal which is ready for your review.  I’m cc’ing this
> message to Lei Guo, who is the contact person for any questions.  Thanks
> for your help!
>
>
>
> Please finish the review by May 4.  Since the authors will need time to
> respond to your suggestions, I hope you can have a first round of comments
> by April 20.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Ken
>
>
>
> From: Lei Guo [mailto:lguo at jlab.org]
> Sent: Friday, April 06, 2012 8:33 PM
> To: Hicks, Kenneth
> Subject: proposal
>
>
>
> Hi, Ken,
>
>
>
> Attached is the our proposals. Please let me know if any more information
> is needed.
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> Lei
>
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>
>
>
> From: Lei Guo <leguo at fiu.edu>
>
> Date: April 6, 2012 6:09:06 PM EDT
>
> To: Lei Guo <lguo at jlab.org>
>
> Subject: proposal
>
>
>
>
>
> <Strangest_01.pdf>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Clas12_verystrange mailing list
> Clas12_verystrange at jlab.org
> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/clas12_verystrange
>