[Clascomment] OPT-IN: Photoproduction of the f1(1285) Meson

[Stepan Stepanyan]

1.	Abstract, line 7, what it means “s-channel decay of the proton or …”, how protons decays?
2.	line 40 – it is not clear what it means “consistent with 100% a0π with a lower limit of 0.69 …”, do you want to say that the ηππ final state comes mostly (100%) from f-> a0π with lower limit of 69%? 
3.	line 118 – the 0.1% is not “of the electron beam energy”, photon energy resolution is dE/E=0.1% where E if the photon energy
4.	line 137 0 0.5% momentum resolution is in forward region, better to write a range 0.5% to 1.5%
5.	page 3, 3rd line below Eq.(1), I think better to say “measured” instead of “reconstructed” in relation to time-of-flight, especially when subscript of TOF says “meas”
6.	page 3, 3rd line below Eq.2, “m is the mass according to the TRACK(or PARTICLE) hypothesis …” not “event hypothesis”  
7.	It will be useful to show mass distributions of missing particles, i.e. the missing mass of γp->pπ+π-X, showing both the γ and η selections, and γp->pK+/-π-/+(X), showing K0 selection.
8.	The missing mass distributions of pπ+π- in the dissertation, Fig.3.2 and Fig.3.20, (assuming this is what was used as am analysis note) have very different features, why? The so-called “hump” on the right side of the peak at 0 in Fig.3.20 is attributed to π0, however that peak is at 0.01 not at 0.018, while p0 peak in Fig.3.3 is in right place.
9.	line 182 – it is better to say “Figure 1 shows the missing mass of x in the reaction …”. Figure is not showing “missing mass x”.
10.	line 221 – describes 4 reactions that have been considered in the simulations but only 2 are described and contributing in Fig. 2. If other 2 are not important, why bring them into discussion and not show anything.
11.	lines 253 and 254 – the two changed kaon channels were combined prior yeald extraction, meaning prior acceptance corrections? 
12.	line 627 – reference to the figure is incorrect
13.	line 709 – the line type for the model should be stated (black dotted)
14.	line 759 – sentence should end with period after 0.022. 
15.	How 4π decay of f(1285) was taken into account when after detecting π+π- two other pions are undetected and their invariant mass falls under the h-selection region. Will this and other contaminations in the missing particle mass regions will effect on branching ratios. The event selection has only 0.2% systematic error in Table I (seems very low) 
16.	page 17, 5th line in last paragraph – should it be “.. if the spin WAS shown …”
17.	line 1255 and 1256, and the caption of Table V, description of the presented in the table differential cross sections are different in the text and in the caption