[Clas12_verystrange] review comments - abstract
ziegler at jlab.org
ziegler at jlab.org
Fri Apr 27 14:38:36 EDT 2012
I'm working on it now. I may not be done until Saturday evening. Is that
OK or do you want the files sooner. I was planning on passing whatever I
have on by Saturday night.
V-.
> Hi, Veronique,
>
> Could you let me know when you are done implementing Keith's comments?
> I will work on from whatever you've done over the weekends, just let
> me know when I can have the latest version.
>
> THanks!
>
> L
> On Apr 24, 2012, at 4:32 PM, ziegler at jlab.org wrote:
>
>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Clas12_verystrange mailing list
>> Clas12_verystrange at jlab.org
>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/clas12_verystrange
>
> **************************************
> @
> / *
> / ___ ___ Lei Guo _______________________
> L_O_/ ____ Florida International University____/_/
> \ | Physics Dept., CP
> 212 / /
> / \ | Miami, FL
> 33199 / / /
> / I_/ \ ____ USA _____ /______/__________/ /
> / /
> L
> / / / /
> /
> / / / / /
> / /
> /_/__________/______/______/__________/_/
> /_/__________/______/______/__________/_/
> 305-348-0234(o)
>
> **************************************
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
More information about the Clas12_verystrange
mailing list