[Clascomment] OPT-IN: Beam asymmetry Sigma for pi+ and pi0 photoproduction on the proton for photon energies from 1.102 to 1.862 GeV
Michael Dugger
dugger at jlab.org
Thu Jul 25 13:57:36 EDT 2013
Dear Daniel,
Thank you for your comments and suggestions. We have revised the paper and
it can be found at
http://www.jlab.org/Hall-B/secure/g8b/ASU/paper/sigmaPaperV1_8d.pdf
Please find our response below:
***************************
-------------------------
Page 1.
Abstract.
- Line 2. Use "... a tagger, linearly polarized photon beam ...".
Reply-> Done.
- Line 7. Use "... both the data, as well as the SAID and Bonn-Gatchina
...".
Reply-> Done.
- Line 10. Remove the comma.
Reply-> Done.
Right column.
- Line 56. I suggest "... in Sec. IX. They are then compared to various
predictions and a ...".
Reply-> Done.
-------------------------
Page 2.
Left column.
- Line 89. Use "... 50\% of its maximum nominal field ...".
Reply-> Done.
- Line 106. Use "... while for some runs, ...".
Reply-> Done.
- Line 107. Use "... of the 1.7~GeV data ...".
Reply-> Done.
- Line 108. Use "... and 1.5~GeV data sets, ...".
Reply-> Done.
-------------------------
Page 3.
General comment.
- Starting with Fig. 3, the placement of the figures is nowhere near
where they are referenced in the text.
Reply->
We have too many figures to place them near the referenced text. When
we try and place the figures near the referenced text, we end up with a
bunch of the figures at the end of the document.
Right column.
- Line 160. You mention a "CLAS magnetic field momentum correction"
but this mention is obtuse at best. I think a sentence clarifying for
the reader what this is all about is appropriate.
Reply->
Changed to:
"
CLAS momentum correction was used. The CLAS momentum correction
optimized the momentum determination through kinematic fitting.
"
-------------------------
Page 4.
General comment.
- What are the APS guidelines for number equations? It seems that you
number some and do not number others. I prefer all equations to be
numbered.
Reply-> We only number the equations that are referenced in the text.
We will let the journal decide if they want the numbering changed.
Right column.
- Put a comma after the cross section equation.
Reply-> Done.
-------------------------
Page 5.
Left column.
- Put a comma after the cross section equation.
Reply-> Done.
- Line before eq.(2). Use "... in eq.(1) is approximated ...".
Reply-> Done.
- Add a comma after eq.(2).
Reply-> Done.
Right column.
- Put a period after eq.(4), not a comma.
Reply-> Done.
-------------------------
Page 6.
Left column.
- After eq.(6) you should explain eq.(5) before you explain eq.(6).
Reply-> Done.
- Line right after 209. Use "... Eqs. (3) ...".
Reply-> Done.
- Line 214. In line 210 you use "mth Fourier moment" and then in line
214 you use "moment-n". Why switch between m and n? I suggest that you
use a consistent notation.
Reply-> Changed to "nth Fourier moment"
Right column.
- Eqs.(14),(15),(16),(17). You should format your parenthesis better.
They are too small for your expressions. In latex math mode, you can use
constructs like $\left( ... \right )$ and they will automatically be
scaled to an appropriate size for the expression you are writing.
Reply-> Done.
- Line 220. Use "... typical data run owing to ...".
Reply-> Done.
- Line 229. You wrote p_para twice.
Reply-> Done.
- Line just before eq.(15). Use "which gives".
Reply-> Done.
-------------------------
Page 7.
Fig. 8.
- The y-axis label sits on top of the y-axis values.
- The 4 curves on the plot are not explained in the caption.
Reply-> We have fixed the figure. The caption has:
"
Solid (dash-dotted) lines correspond to the SAID DU12
(CM12~\protect\cite{cm12}) solution.
Dashed (short-dashed) lines give the MAID07~\protect\cite{Maid07}
(BG2011-02 BnGa~\protect\cite{BnGa}) predictions.
"
Left column.
- First line. Use "... of eqs. (14) ...".
Reply-> Done.
- Add a period after eq.(18).
Reply-> Done.
Right column.
- Line 244. Use "... the yield of the particular meson peak ...".
Reply-> Done.
- Last line. Use "... index $i$ and \cos $\theta$ bin ...". Note that
you are not consistent with your notation in this paper. Sometimes you
write "$\cos \theta$" and sometimes you write "$\cos (\theta)$".
Reply-> Changed text as requested, and I am now using $\cos (\theta)$
consistently.
-------------------------
Page 8.
Figs. 9,10,11,12.
- The y-axis label sits on top of the y-axis values.
Reply-> Fixed.
Left column.
- Line 252. Use "... of eq.(19) have ...".
Reply-> Done.
Right column.
- Add a comma after the first equation.
Reply-> Done.
- Add a period after the last equation.
-------------------------
Page 9.
Fig. 10.
- The 4 curves on the plot are not explained in the caption.
Reply-> The figure caption has:
Solid (dash-dotted) lines correspond to the SAID DU12
(CM12~\protect\cite{cm12}) solution. Dashed (short-dashed)
lines give the MAID07~\protect\cite{Maid07}
(BG2011-02 BnGa~\protect\cite{BnGa}) predictions.
Left column.
- Add a comma after the first equation.
Reply-> Done.
- Add a comma after "N_\gamma" just before the second equation.
Reply-> Done.
Right column.
- Add a period after the first equation.
Reply-> Done.
- Remove the first comma on the line after the first equation.
Reply-> Done.
- Add a period after the second equation.
-------------------------
Page 10.
Left column.
- Line 256. Use "... by eq.(19) ...".
Reply-> Done.
Right column.
- Add a comma after eq.(20).
Reply-> Done.
- Add a period after Sigma variance equation.
Reply-> Done.
- Add a comma after the last equation.
Reply-> Done.
-------------------------
Page 11.
Left column.
- Put a period after the last equation.
Reply-> Done.
Right column.
- Line 266. Use ".. but had an 18 ...".
Reply-> Done.
- Line 270. Use "... were determined ...".
Reply-> Done.
- Line 274. Use "It was assumed ...".
Reply-> Done.
-------------------------
Page 12.
Left column.
- Line 278. Put a period at the end of the line.
Reply-> Done.
Right column.
- Line 285. Use "... set was approximated ...".
Reply-> Done.
-------------------------
Page 13.
Left column.
- Line 294. List this reaction consistently. You used pi+pi- on the
previous page. Here you use pi-pi+.
Reply-> Fixed.
Right column.
- Line 307. I suggest "... $M_X$ in the $\gamma p \to pX$ reaction
was ...".
Reply-> Done.
-------------------------
Page 14.
Right column.
- Line 324. I suggest "... to be the $\gamma p \to p \pi^0$ yield in
the given analysis bin.".
- Line 325. Use "... of the yield of the neutron peak ...".
Reply-> Done.
-------------------------
Page 16.
Left column.
- Last line. Use "... mesons was determined for each ...".
Reply-> Done.
Right column.
- Second line. Use "... bin were formed ...".
Reply-> Done.
-------------------------
Page 18.
Left column.
- Starting in line 379 you have changed the style of your symbol for
"phi" from what you had been using earlier in the paper. Be consistent.
Reply-> Changed all to $\varphi$.
-------------------------
Page 19.
Left column.
- Line 483. Use "... seen in the DNPL data ...".
Reply-> Done.
Right column.
- You have just got done with a lengthy paragraph describing in some
detail the comparison between the pi0 data sets. Then you have a single
general sentence for the pi+ data. This seems a little out of balance.
Reply-> The comparison between CLAS and previous measurements for pi+
data has been expanded.
- Line 528. Is the first time that you introduced the notation
"CM12". I didn't know what this was until later on in the section. I
suggest that you tell us what CM12 is when you first introduce this
version of the SAID model.
Reply-> Fixed
-------------------------
Page 21.
General.
- You often put a comma between the author's name and "et al.". No
comma should be here.
Reply-> Fixed.
- I could not find where you referred to Ref.[30] or [32] in the
paper. Perhaps I missed them somehow, but you should double check.
Reply-> Ref. [32] (now Ref. [31]) was used in Fig. 13. Removed Ref.[30].
-------------------------
***************************
Take care,
Michael
More information about the Clascomment
mailing list