[Clascomment] OPT-IN: Double K0_S Photoproduction off the Proton at CLAS
Daniel Carman
carman at jlab.org
Sun Oct 15 12:25:22 EDT 2017
Dear Shloka and Ken:
I have read through your draft of the g12 meson analysis and include
my comments below. The paper is well laid out and presents quite an
interesting analysis. Most of what I have provided below will serve
to improve the grammar and readability of the paper. If you have any
questions, let me know.
Regards,
Daniel
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
General:
- You have written most of the analysis section in the present tense
when the past tense is more appropriate. I have tried to catch all
of this below.
- You switch between "dependence" and "dependance" in the text. Both
are acceptable, so choose one spelling.
Page 1:
Abstract:
- Line 3. Use "... via decay into the ...".
Left column:
Paragraph 2:
- Last line. You do not need to include Ref.[1] here as you just
cited it in the previous sentence.
Paragraph 3:
- Line 6. Use "... intervals makes the ...".
- Line 7. Use "... to model [3]."
Paragraph 4:
- Line 1. Remove the comma after "years".
Right column:
Paragraph 3:
- Line 2. Use "... [7]. Production can occur ...".
- Line 7. Use "$t$-channel".
Page 2:
Left column:
Paragraph 2:
- Line 1, 2, 5, 6. Use "$t$-channel" and "$s$-channel".
- Line 3. Use "... of the detected particles ...".
Paragraph 3:
- Line 6. Use "... to study the $t$-dependence of the yield ...".
Paragraph 4:
- Line 3. Use "... Spectrometer (CLAS) [9].".
- Line 9. Use "... called g12, ...".
- Line 11. Use "... 20\% to 95\% ...".
- Line 15. Use "... polarization was not used ...".
Paragraph 6:
- Line 3. 0.5% momentum resolution is too good for CLAS.
Right column:
Paragraph 2:
- Line 7 after Eq.(2). Use "... proton is identified via the ...".
Paragraph 3:
- Line 3. You give Ref.[9] here, but it should be Ref.[13].
Paragraph 5:
- Line 1. Use "... DAQ recorded ...".
- Line 2. Use "... photons could be ...".
- Line 3. Use "... Of these photons, it was necessary ...".
- Line 5. Use "... were extrapolated ...".
- Line 8. Use "... track was calculated.".
- Line 10. Use "... position in the target, ...".
- Line 11. Use "... was taken as the ..."
Page 3:
Left column:
Paragraph 1:
- Line 2. Use "... method was employed.".
- Line 4. Use "... flight was constrained ...".
- Line 5. Use "... TOF was determined ...".
- Line 6. Use "... particles was assumed ...".
- Line 8. Use "... we calculated the time ...".
Paragraph 2:
- Line 2. Use "... scintillator hit ...".
- Line 1 after Eq.(6). Use "... was calculated ... was applied.".
- Line 2 after Eq.(6). Use "... cut lead to ...".
- Line 4 after Eq.(6). Use "... event was passed ...".
Paragraph 3:
- Line 1. Use "... time matched ...".
- Line 2. Use "... pions was chosen.".
- Line 3. Use "... there could be ...".
- Line 6. Use "... pions was calculated.".
- Line 7. Use "... photon was within ...".
- Line 8. Use "... photon was chosen.".
- Line 9. Use "... accounted for ...".
Paragraph 4:
- Line 1. Use "... magnet consisted of ...".
- Line 2. Use "beamline".
- Line 3. Use "... particles hit a ...".
Right column:
Fig. 2 caption:
- Line 3. Use "... the four detected charged particles.".
- Line 4. Use "A clear peak is seen at the ...".
Paragraph 1:
- Line 1. Use "... and scattered into ...".
- Line 2. Use "... track would be observed. Also particle tracks
reconstructed very near the coils could be inaccurate ...".
- Line 5. Use "... into the regions ... surrounding the coils.".
Paragraph 2:
- Line 4. Use "... [14] was employed. This corrected for ...".
Page 4:
Left column:
Paragraph 1:
- Line 1. Use "... reaction was calculated ...".
- Line 2. Use "... of the detected ...".
- Eq.(7). End with a period.
- Line 1 after Eq.(7). Use "... particle was then ...".
- Line 2 after Eq.(7). Use "... that had a missing ...".
- Line 6 after Eq.(7). Use "... peak was significantly ...".
- Line 7 after Eq.(7). Use "... cuts were employed.".
Paragraph 2:
- Line 2. Use "... main interest in this work, can be ...".
Right column:
Paragraph 1:
- Eq.(10). End with a period.
- Line 1 after Eq.(10). Use "... pions was based ...".
- Line 2 after Eq.(10). Use "... they were recorded ...".
- Line 7 after Eq.(10). Use "$K_S^0$".
- Line 8 after Eq.(10). Use "... pions, the other ...".
- Line 9 after Eq.(10). Use "... showed similar ...".
Paragraph 2:
- Line 5. Use "... reduce the background ...".
- Line 7. Use "... subtraction was used. A ... Table I) was ...".
- Line 11. Use "$K_S^0$".
Paragraph 3:
- Line 12. Use "... were produced ...".
- Line 13. Use "... were subtracted ...".
Paragraph 4:
- There is clearly a peak at 1.75 GeV that I believe you too
casually dismiss. Its presence is just as "clear" as the
1.28 GeV peak. I would like to see the language improved
here a bit. Perhaps you can say that your interest is in the
dominant peak at 1.5 GeV and that the strength at 1.75 GeV
will be investigated in future higher statistics data sets
acquired with CLAS12.
Page 5:
Fig. 4:
- Wouldn't a log z-scale make this plot clearer for your discussion.
Left column:
Paragraph 1:
- Line 3. Use "... $t$, were applied ...".
- Eq.(11). End with a comma.
Paragraph 2:
- Line 4. Use "$s$-channel".
Right column:
Paragraph 2:
- Line 8. Use "... change our conclusions."
Paragraph 3:
- Line 1. Use "To look for any possible background baryon resonances
decaying into $K_S^0$ ...".
- Line 2. Use "$M^2(K_S^0,K_S^0)$".
- Line 3. Use "$K_S^0$".
Fig. 6 discussion. Why do you not correct the yield distributions here
for CLAS acceptance? How can the reader be sure that the differences
are not due to acceptance effects? Seems like a statement is needed
here.
Page 6:
Fig. 7:
- Wouldn't a log z-scale make this plot clearer for your discussion.
- Caption line 2. Use "$M^2(K_S^0,K_S^0)$".
- Why do you cut off the y-axis so close to the f0(980)?
Left column:
Paragraph 1:
- Line 1. Use "... < 1$~GeV$^2$ and ...".
Right column:
Paragraph 2:
- Line 5. Use "... events were passed ...".
- Line 6. Use "... accounted for ...".
- Line 8. Use "... removed hits that came from ...".
- Line 9. Use "... and smeared values ...".
Page 7:
Left column:
Paragraph 1:
- Line 1. Use "... events were then ...".
Paragraph 2:
- Line 2. Use "... software were fed ...".
- Line 9. Use "... then added to the phase space ...".
Paragraph 3:
- Line 2. Use "... > 1$~GeV$^2$ ...".
Paragraph 4:
- Line 3. Use "... $J$=0 and $J$=2.".
Paragraph 5:
- Line 1. Use "... events were binned ...".
- Lines 10, 11, 13. Use "$S$" and "$D$".
Paragraph 6:
- Lines 2, 5. Use "$S$" and "$D$".
- Line 5. Use "... waves were fit ...".
- Here it is not clear to what polar angle you are referring. Be
explicit and not just mention the frame.
Right column:
Paragraph 1:
- Line 3. Use "... were normalized ...".
Paragraph 2:
- Line 1. Use "... regions were fit ...".
- Line 3. Use "$S$" and "$D$".
- Eq.(12). End with a comma.
- Lines 2, 3, 6, 9, 11, 12 after Eq.(12). Use "$S$" and "$D$".
- Line 2 after Eq.(12). Use "... $S$-wave strength.".
- Line 5 after Eq.(12). I do not know what you mean by "bi-modal
ambiguity".
- Lines 10, 11, 12. There are no dashed and dotted line types, only
solid.
Paragraph 3:
- Lines 4, 7, 9, 11. Use "$S$" and "$D$".
- Line 15. Use "... of resonance contributions ...".
Paragraph 4:
- Line 3. Use ".. This represents the ...".
Page 8:
Fig. 8 and discussion. You have not said how you combined/normalized the
background, f0(980), and f0(1500) events.
Fig. 8 caption:
- Line 1. Use "Invariant mass spectrum of four $\pi$ phase space plus
simulated $f_0(980)$ and $f_0(1500)$ mesons ... (right) are shown.".
Fig. 9:
- Wouldn't a log z-scale make this plot clearer for your discussion.
- Caption
- Line 1. Use "$M^2(K_S^0,K_S^0)$" and "$K_S^0$".
- Line 2. Use ".. plus $f_0(980)$ and $f_0(1500)$ mesons."
- Line 2. You mention "insets", but there are no insets here.
- Why do you cut off the y-axis so close to the f0(980)?
Table II. Use "Fraction of $S$-wave strength ...". Again, why do
CLAS acceptance affects impact the findings here?
Page 9, 10, 11:
Figs. 10, 11, 12:
- Mass units at the top of all plots are incorrect.
- x-axis labels need to be remade to be "$\cos \theta$".
Fig. 10 caption.
- Lines 1, 2. Use "$S$" and "$D$".
Page 10:
Left column:
Paragraph 2:
- Line 8. Use "$t$-channel".
Paragraph 3:
- Line 2. Use "... with CLAS for ...".
- Line 4. Use "... contributions from the ...".
- Line 6. Use "... decay was compared ...".
- Lines 7, 9. Use "$S$" and "$D$".
- Line 8. Use "... regions were separately ...".
- Line 10. Use "... and the differences between the two gave an ...".
Paragraph 4:
- Line 2. Use "... have an almost 100\% $S$-wave ...".
- Line 4. Use "f_2'(1525)".
Right column:
Paragraph 1:
- Lines 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 10. Use "$S$" and "$D$".
- Line 5. Use "... which was necessary ...".
Paragraph 2:
- Lines 3, 7. Use "$S$" and "$D$".
- Line 9. Use "$t$-channel".
Page 11:
References:
[1]. Use "... 63}, 74 (2009)."
[2]. Use "... 60}, 034509 (1999).".
[3]. Use "... 88}, 0100001 (2012) ...".
[4]. Do not include title.
[5]. Use "... 76}, 065204 (2007).".
[6]. Use "... 91}, 106002 (2015).".
[9]. Use "... A {\bf 532}, 513 (2003)".
[10]. Use "... A {\bf 440}, 263 (2000)".
[11]. Use "... A {\bf 449}, 81 (2000)".
[12]. Use "... A {\bf 556}, 246 (2006)".
More information about the Clascomment
mailing list