[Clascomment] OPT-IN:Deeply Virtual Compton Scattering measurement off bound protons

[Michel Gar�on]

Since HERMES already measured DVCS BSA on « coherent enriched » and « incoherent enriched » event samples off He4, one has to be more careful i) in the use of “first” in the abstract and on lines 62 and 270, ii) on the way to quote or qualify ref. [30]. In any case, the way it is done now is not OK if only because Figs 5 and 6 show that there were previous measurements, and this is contradictory with the use of “first”. My suggestion would be to keep the word “first” (at the risk of having problems with a referee), except maybe in line 62, to remove the ref 30 in line 49 and to add at the end of the paragraph in line 61 the sentence: “The previous (or pioneering?) measurements of DVCS off nuclei, and in particular off 4He, performed at HERMES [30] yielded results with both “coherent enriched” and “incoherent enriched” event samples, hence not fully exclusive, but significant enough to be compared with our results below”.

Abstract line 3: “within” or “close to the center of” instead of “in front of”.

Abstract next to last line: “for studying the structure of bound nucleons”

Line 50: happens -> occurs

Fig. 1 caption: is not it -2ksi, and not 2ksi ?

Line 158: …minimum kinematically allowed…

Line 188-192: one wonders what is done with this 6.5%. If nothing is done, should be stated explicitly and/or justified

Figs 2, 3 and 4: tick labels too small.

Line 277: I would drop “exciting”; “novel” is enough.

Ref. [3]: why not quote the latest 2018 issue? It also contains a section on DIS.

Ref. [20]: this work was superseded by PRC92, 055202 (2015), a reanalysis of the same data. I would either replace Munoz Camacho et al. by Defurne et al, or add to CMC: updated in ….

Ref[38]: add B+M, PRD82, 0704010 (2010).

Ref.[39]: why not give the publicly accessible link to the proposal ?

Congratulations on the good work,
Michel.