[Clascomment] OPT-IN: Separated Structure Functions for Exclusive K+ Lambda and K+ Sigma 0 Electroproduction at 5.5 GeV with CLAS

[Enzo DeSanctis]

The paper is well written. I have only the following aesthetical suggestions.

In the abstract, line 8, I would write ‘… meson photo- and electro-production …’ (with the hyphen between electro and production), instead of ‘… meson photo- and electroproduction …’ . This also happens on page 5, 2nd par., line 2; page 7, 2nd par., line 6; page 9, 3rd par., line 5; page 38, last par., line 3; page 47, last par., line 3.

Page 6, 3rd par., line 2: we should define the Mandelstam variables s, t and u.

Page 25, 3rd par., line 1: drop ‘were’ between ‘cross section’ and ‘computed’.

Page 25, last par., line 2: -- > ‘which can be seen …’

Page 28, caption of Table II: one should say that the total quoted systematic errors are obtained by adding in quadrature the different contributions.

Page 33, caption of fig. 13: I would add the references for the quoted model calculations, MX, GLV, and RPR. Moreover, in the figure, instead of repeating K+Lambda in the top panel of each column, I would write the reaction ‘gamma*p--> K+Lambda’ as a title in a line above the figure.
The latter should also be made also in Figs. 14, 15, and 16.

Page 37, 2nd par., line 1: insert a comma after ‘For K+Lambda’

Page 37, 3rd  par., line 1: insert a comma after ‘For K+Lambda’

Page 38, 3rd  par., line 1: insert a comma after ‘For K+Lambda’. 

Page 38, 3rd  par., line 2: insert a comma after ‘W’ in ‘For higher W, where…’.

Page 39 (40): In the figure 17 (18), instead of repeating K+Lambda (K+Sigma) in the top panel of each column, I would write the reaction gamma*p--> K+Lambda (K+Sigma) as a title in a line above the figure.

Page 41, 2nd par., line 1-2: I do not understand ‘except at the most forward angles’. From the figure, at forward angles sigma_U is still negative.

Page 42, Fig. 19: writings in the panels are not easily readable. I would use larger font or, even better, use plots with bigger-size. I would also move the writings ‘K+Lamba, W=1.275 GeV (1.925 GeV)’ which appears on the same line as the x-axis labels, in a line below the plots. The latter should also made in Figs. 20 for the writing ‘K+Sigma, W=1.275 GeV (1.925 GeV)’.

Figs. 21, 22, 23 and 24 are not easily readable. I would make them larger and use small- size data-points.

Page 49: Ref. 39, write ‘Giusti’ and not ‘Guisti’ (twice