[Clas_cascades] comments to the Phi-- analysis note

[Elton Smith]

Hi Hovanes,

I have a few comments to the analysis note:

p. 34, end of second paragraph,
It would be useful to quote the magnitude of the trigger corrections. For
example: For our Phi-- sample, the trigger corrections were approximately
10% before run 45527 and approximately 50% afterwards.

p. 42 upper limits, end of paragraph,
The number of 550 pb is in the region of the Xi-pi- mass of 1.86 and
should be stated.

p. 42 middle bottom paragraph
Fig 23 -> Fig 23a

p. 44 middle top paragraph
stardart -> standard

p. 44 Sec 14.1.1, middle
States that "The reason for this is that one of the three methods
described below is not well-suited to handle acceptance and background
uncertainties."  Specify which one. (Which one is it?)

p. 44 Sec 14.1.2
What do we use for e_m and and sigma_em? If they depend on mass, give a
typical value or a range for the calculation.

p. 46 Sec 14.1.3
I'm confused by some of this paragraph. Did you not include the systematic
errors into these upper limits? Also give the values of the
systematic errors included into the upper limit. Update [39] with NIM
A604:729(2009).

p. 47 fig 29 caption, last sentence
"...shows the 90%CL upper limit of 550 pb for masses between 1.80 and
1.92 GeV."

p. 48. Conclusion.
"... was obtained using the ROLKE method similar to the one described in
Ref [37]. The 90%CL upper limit for the cross sections for Phi--
photoproduction near threshold with subsequent decay to Phi--=>Xi-pi- in a
20 MeV mass bins depends on the Xi-pi- mass. The upper limit at 1.49 GeV
is 3 nb and decreases monitonically to 0.3 nb at 2.2 GeV. In the mass
range of 1.80 to 1.92 GeV, the upper limit is ~550 pb. This is a factor of
three..."

Thanks, Elton.


Elton Smith
Jefferson Lab MS 12H5
12000 Jefferson Ave
Suite # 16
Newport News, VA 23606
elton at jlab.org
(757) 269-7625
(757) 269-6331 fax