[Clascomment] OPT-IN:Cross sections for the gamma p --> K* + Lambda and K *+ Sigma 0 reactions measured at CLAS

[Wei Tang]

Hi Volker,

Thank you for your comments, I will look at them and make corrections to
our draft paper.

Best Regards,

Wei


> This is a nice paper and very well written. I have only a few relatively
> minor comments:
>
> 1) page 1, right column, end of 2nd paragraph make reference to
> Bonn-Gatchina analysis.
> Since the evidence for new states in the BnGa analysis comes in large
> parts from CLAS hyperon
> photo-production data I suggest to modify the sentence as follows:
> "We can look for other "missing resonance" states at higher mass, such as
> those identified in
> the Bonn-Gatchina analysis [11] largely through precise hyperon
> photo-production data from CLAS,
> by comparing K* photo-production data to model calculations."
>
> 2) page 2, left column,
> middle of 3rd paragraph: refers to CLAS momentum resolution as ~0.1%.
> This should be more like 0.5-1.0%.
>
> 3) page 2, left column, end of section II.  DAQ live time is given as 90%,
> while on page 6 it is given as 82%.
>
> 4) page 11, last paragraph in section VI.  It states that ".. the model
> without kappa exchange is in better
> agreement with the data ratio."
> If I understand correctly, this statement is to some degree based on Fig.
> 12 where the ratio of the two CLAS data sets
> taken with the same detector (but from different run groups) is shown with
> the ratio of cross sections
> from CBELSA on K*0Sigma^+ divided
> by the CLAS K*+Lambda data. For the ratio of CLAS data one can expect at
> least some of the systematic
> errors to drop out while this is not the case for the CBELSA/CLAS ratio.
> In their paper (ref. [6]) the CBELSA
> group shows that their Sigma^+ data are systematically above the CLAS
> Sigma^+ data at more forward angles, so that the
> ratio of total cross sections will also be above the CLAS data ratio. I
> think we should not plot the ratio of cross sections
> measured in different labs and with different detectors.  If we only
> compare the models to ratio of CLAS data,
>  the conclusion would be somewhat different, namely that model II may
> include too strong a
> coupling to the kappa and the data may be consistent with a smaller
> coupling but not with the complete
> absence of the kappa in the model.
>
> 5) Fig. 10: do not use green color for one of the models, it may not be
> visible in the b/w printed version.
> Use a dashed black line or (if color is preferred) a dashed blue line.
>
> 6) Fig.12: Do not include the CBELSA/CLAS ratio, it is misleading. Limit
> the horizontal axis to Eg=3.25GeV,
>  and the vertical axis to 1.5 (if CBELSA/CLAS ratio is removed).
>
> 7) a couple typos:
> page6, right column, 1st line after eqn (12):  "to extracted"  => "to
> extract".
> page 7, right column, line 2: "and Figs. 7 to ?? shows.." => "and Fig. 7
> shows..".
>
>
>
> This is it for now.
> Volker
>
>