[Clascomment] OPT-IN:Beam-spin Asymmetries from Semi-inclusive Pion Electroproduction

[Daniel Carman]

						November 15, 2013


Dear Wes et al.,

I have read through your paper on the beam spin asymmetry in pi SIDIS and my comments 
are included below. I include all of my comments below. If you have any questions, 
let me know.

					Regards,

				           Daniel

********************************************************************
Page 1.
 - Abstract.
   - Line 3. Use "electroproduction".
   - Line 4. I suggest "Data were taken with the CLAS spectrometer at Jefferson Lab ...".
   - Line 8. Use "The moment was measured ...".
   - Line 8. Use "$A_{LU}^{\sin \phi}$ is a twist-3 ...".
   - Line 9. Use "... data provides an important ...".
 - Line 19. Use "necessitate an understanding ...".
 - Line 40. Use "... (SSAs), have emerged ...".
 - Line 43. Use "... of final state particles, ...".
 - Eq.(1). What is M?
 - Eq.(2). What is sig_0? Add a comma at the end of the equation.
 - Line 70. Use "$U$".

Page 2.
 - Fig. 1 caption.
   - Line 2. I suggest "... the plane defined by the incident and scattered electron, and
       that defined by the direction ...".
 - Line 77. The q-g-q correlation is mentioned here and repeated in line 87 almost verbatim.
    I suggest that you say here "$A_{LU}^{\sin \phi}$ can be expressed as a convolution ...".
 - Line 89. Use "... twist is the power with ...".
 - Line 90. Use "$M$".
 - Line 92. Use "power $p$".
 - Line 93. Use "... the ratio $M/Q$ occurs, where $Q$ is ...".
 - Line 94. I suggest "(twist order = $2+p$)". The variable t can be confused with the Mandelstam
     variable.
 - Eq.(3). On the left-side you use "\phi_h". This is a notation change. Also, end the equation 
     with a period. Finally, what is "a" that you are summing over?
 - Line 118. Use "... access to the twist-3 ...".
 - Line 143. Use "... for a complete description ...".

Page 3.
 - Line 151. Use "... 75\pm3$\%, incident upon an unpolarized ...".
 - Line 154. 10% uncertainties or less. Be clear whether you are talking about total uncertainty
    or just statistical uncertainty.
 - Line 163. This sentence is awkward. I suggest that you just remove it altogether.
 - General note: Starting at this point you write in the present tense, which I don't think is
    proper. You should use the past tense for describing what you did. Hence my comments below.
 - Line 174. Use "was located".
 - Line 175. Use "Hall B". Use "detector was composed" (CLAS no longer exists anyway).
 - Line 178. Use "Particles were detected".
 - Fig. 4.
   - Poor quality figure. Looks fuzzy.
   - Caption.
     - Line 3. Use "25 were kept".
     - Line 4. Use "were subjected".
     - Line 8. Use "using the CC".
 - Line 183. Use "traveled through CLAS in".
 - Line 185. Use "were lost".
 - Line 186. Use "were bent out".
 - Line 190. Use "Electrons were identified".
 - Line 192. Use "cuts were instituted".
 - Line 193. Use "did not produce".
 - Line 195. Use "were used".
 - Line 196. Use "cuts were made".
 - Line 203. Use "Photomultipliers were used".
 - Line 204. Use "particle passed".
 - Line 206. Use "was established". Use "was accepted".
 - Line 208. Use "was less".
 - Line 209. Use "was applied".
 - Line 211. Use "was used".

Page 4.
 - Fig. 5 caption.
   - Line 1. Use "$E/p$ vs $p$".
   - line 3. Use "were kept".
 - Line 213. Use "were mostly". Use "Cuts were".
 - Line 214. Use "that could be seen".
 - Line 216. Use "which removed".
 - Line 217. Use "Cuts were".
 - Line 224. Use "momentum in the EC, should be roughly"
 - Line 225. Use "was computed".
 - Line 227. Use "was fit".
 - Line 229. Use "The cut was".
 - Line 231. Use "of $p$ and".
 - Line 253. Use "The CLAS EC is separated ...".
 - Line 243. Use "cuts were".
 - Line 245. Use "where shower leakage may occur, resulting in" (no shower outside EC as there is
      no material).
 - Line 247. Use "Cuts were".
 - Line 251. Use "Events were".
 - Fig. 6 caption.
   - Line 4. Use "were removed".
 - Line 252. Use "were within".
 - Line 253. Use "$\Delta t$".
 - Line 255. Use "were identified".
 - Line 257. Use "were used".
 - Line 258. Use "was measured".
 - Line 259. Use "combined to".
 - Line 261. Use "tracks had to be".
 - Line 262. Use "channels had to be".
 - Line 265. Use "was computed".
 - Eq.(4). Put a comma at the end of the equation.
 - Line 274. Use "proton and kaon tracks."
 - Line 275. Use "was necessary".
 - Line 276. "Cuts opposite to those used ..." This language is not clear to me.
 - Line 278. Use "were used".
 - Line 281. Use "were identified".
 - Line 282. Use "were detected".

Page 5.
 - Fig. 7 caption.
   - Line 5. Use "were used".
 - Line 283. Use "was computed".
 - Line 285. Use "were distinguished".
 - Line 288. Use "was measured".
 - Eq.(5). Put a comma at the end of the equation.
 - Line 292. Use "was necessary".
 - Line 294. Use "was smaller".
 - Line 295. Typo on "inaccurate".
 - Line 296. Use "was made".
 - Line 297. Use "was similar".
 - Line 300. Use "was binned".
 - Line 301. Use "was then".
 - Line 304. Use "polynomial was of".
 - Line 306. Use "was insured".
 - Line 307. Use "was the same"
 - Fig. 8 caption.
   - Line 1. Use "in the CLAS EC.".
   - Line 3. Use "was used".
 - Fig. 9 caption.
   - Line 3. Use "was fit".
   - Line 4. Use "was integrated".
 - Line 310. Use "was determined".
 - Line 312. Use "... $\pm 3 \sigma$, where ... in that bin, and ...".
 - Eq.(6). Use "bin size".

Page 6.
 - Line 319. Use "transfer squared, from the ...".
 - Line 323. Use "were performed".
 - Line 330. Use "... experiment in CLAS was ...".
 - Line 332. Use "was available".
 - Line 334. Use "$Q^2 < 1$~GeV$^2$ were cut ...".
 - Line 337. Use "was imposed".
 - Line 339. Use "was removed". Use "$z$".
 - Line 340. Use "effectively removed".
 - Line 350. Use "were computed".
 - Eq.(8). Put a comma at the end of the equation.
 - Line 351. Use "were computed".
 - Line 352. This form of the statistical uncertainty is not correct if your events are
      from some background-subtracted distribution. If there is background subtraction, then
      sqrt(N) underestimates the uncertainty. Please comment.
 - Line 354. Use "was included".
 - Line 356. Use "was binned".
 - Line 357. Use "were applied".
 - Line 358. Use "... to limit the results only to the SIDIS kinematic region."
 - Line 360. Use "was binned".
 - Line 362. Use "was also".
 - Line 366. Use "were binned".
 - Line 367. Use "was derived".
 - Line 368. Use " from Eq. 2 as".
 - Eq.(9). Put a comma at the end of the equation.
 - Line 369. Use "and the coefficient $A$ was extracted as the value of ..."
 - Line 370. Use "in each bin.".
 - Fig. 10 caption.
   - Line 2. Use "$z$, $x$,".

Page 7.
 - Line 378. Use "were computed".
 - Line 381. Use "were consistent".
 - Line 382. Use "was set".
 - Line 383. Use "bin returned a $p$-value ...".
 - Line 384. Use "was rejected". Use "was removed".
 - Line 385. Use "$p$-values".
 - Line 388. Use "$p$-value also served to ... $\chi^2$ higher than would ...".
 - Line 390. Use "was compared".
 - Line 391. What is the abbreviation "p.d.f"?
 - Line 396. Use "was then".
 - Fig. 12 caption.
   - Line 1. Use "$p$-value" (twice on this line).
   - Line 2. Use "did not pass ... and were removed.".
 - Line 403. Use "was estimated".
 - Line 408. Use "was estimated".
 - Line 411. Use "were estimated".

Page 8.
 - Line 430. Use "was that".
 - Line 444. Use "were integrated".
 - Line 449. Use "was extracted".
 - Line 451. Use "was tested".
 - Line 454. Use "was derived".
 - Line 460. Use "We did not".
 - Line 461. Use "still made".
 - Line 464. Use "were fit".
 - Line 465. Use "were compared".
 - Line 469. Use "were used".
 - Line 472. Use "were observed".
 - Line 474. Use "was seen to be".
 - Line 476. Use "to test the fitting".
 - Line 479. Use "was done".
 - Line 480. Use "was to seed".
 - Line 482. Use "second was to test".
 - Line 491. Use "were added".
 - Line 494. Use "were summed".
 - Line 495. Use $\delta P_e$. Use "was then".
 - Line 496. Use "of the beam polarization".
 - Eq.(11). Use "$\delta$ for uncertainty to be consistent with earlier notation.

Page 9.
 - Fig. 14 caption.
   - Line 2. Use "$z$".
   - Line 3. Use "was made".
   - Line 4. Use "a random helicity and comparing ...".
 - Line 498. Use "were averaged".
 - Line 501. Use "... asymmetries was found to be negligible ...".
 - Line 507. Use "was computed".
 - Line 510. Use "Monte Carlo".
 - Line 512. Use "was analyzed".
 - Line 513. Use "had passed".
 - Line 515. Use "was computed".
 - Eq.(12). Put a comma after the equation.
 - Line 519. Use "($R$= ... $G$= ...)".
 - Line 520. Use "was then".
 - Eq.(13). Put a comma after the equation.
 - Line 522. Use "$M$=".
 - Line 525. Use "were in agreement".
 - Line 527. Use "was seen to be equal ... state, the corrected $BSA$, which we call $BSA'$, 
     is ...".
 - Eq.(15). Put a period after the equation.
 - Line 543. Use "were integrated".
 - Line 544. Use "was integrated".
 - Line 548. Use "using CLAS and for ...".
 - Line 555. Use "$\phi$".

Page 10.
 - Figs. 15 and 16 need to have axis labels and numbers redone in a larger font. Also, it
   is hard to make out which symbols are for which pions.
 - Fig. 15 caption.
    - Line 1. Use "... over the other kinematic variables ...".
 - Fig. 16. Pt labels on plots are missing units.
 - Fig. 16 caption.
    - Line 1. Use "$x$".

Page 11.
 - Line 571. Use "$z$-dependence".
 - Line 601. Use "with a significant".
 - Line 615. Use "indicates that Sivers-type".
 - Line 629. Use "the CLAS [48,56,57] and HERMES [49] Collaborations.".
 - Line 636. Use "CLAS Collaboration".

Page 12. 
 - Tables II and III are not referenced in the text.
 - The data should also be in the CLAS physics database and a reference included here.

Page 13.
 - Fig. 17 is not referenced in the text.
 - Fig. 17 caption.
   - Line 1. Use "f(y)$, where ...".
   - Line 2. Use "experiment, the open (red) ...".
   - Line 3. Use "... are the statistical uncertainty and the solid bands ...".
 - Fig. 18 caption.
   - Line 3. Use "contribution (dashed-dot)".

Page 14.
 - General.
    - Many references do not have proper spacing in the journal names. You should have
      e.g. Phys. Rev. Lett. and not Phys.Rev.Lett..
    - Do not include preprint numbers for published papers.
 - [1]. Use "European Muon Collaboration".
 - [2]. Use "arXiv:1106.5769".
 - [12]. Reference is incomplete.
 - [23]. Use "arXiv:1210.4790".
 - [30]. Use "COMPASS Collaboration" (drop the "The").
 - [32]. Use "arXiv:1207.5221".
 - [34]. Use "B.A. Mecking". Note this reference is not a "CLAS Collaboration" paper.
 - [42]. Reference is incomplete.
 - [48]. Use "CLAS Collaboration".
 - [49]. Use "HERMES Collaboration".
 - [50]. Use "arXiv:1306.1004".
 - [53]. Use "HERMES Collaboration".
 - [56]. Use "CLAS Collaboration".