[Clascomment] OPT-IN:Suppression of neutral pion production in deep-inelastic scattering off nuclei with the CLAS detector

[Taisiya Mineeva]

Dear Lamiaa,

Thank you for your invaluable comments regarding the paper draft and
further considerations when submitting the paper to PRL. I am working on
your comments, I shall be back with you on it shortly.

With best regards,
Taisiya


On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 9:31 PM Lamiaa El Fassi <elfassi at jlab.org> wrote:

> First, I would like to congratulate Taisiya and the lead authors for the
> approval of these interesting results and I wish you all the best with the
> collaboration-wide review as well as the PRL submission.
> Probably, you have already received some overlapping comments from other
> collaborators, so I apologize for the intended duplication but I want to
> make sure I conveyed all notes as there is no way to see what others shared
> at this level. I hope you will find the comments helpful to polish the
> manuscript.
> By the way, one main issue I faced is related to the removal of line
> numbers in this review round, which makes comments quite difficult.
>
> General comments:
>
> Author list: Please write all authors with their publication names:
> T.~Mineeva, W.K. Brooks...., J.A. Lopez...
> (P.S.: If accepted in PRL, you will be asked to provide the zip codes for
> all institutions listed in the manuscript, so you may work on that from now
> on if you want to)
>
> - Please make sure to be consistent with the verb tense used throughout
> the manuscript and don't switch back and forth between present and past
> tenses. You may avoid that e.g. by using the passive voice to refer to what
> happened in the past for some instances.
>
> - Please avoid using the speaker pronouns (we, our...) as that can be
> avoided by using the passive voice. This should be applied everywhere in
> this manuscript except for the abstract and acknowledgment section if
> needed.
>
> - Regardless of the nice review of theoretical models included in the
> paper, the results of Fig. 2 and Fig. 3 are presented without any
> theoretical curves, even GiBUU is not considered here. Thus, I wonder why?
> P.S.: Based on my PRL lambda paper experience, the external reviewers
> asked to include more theoretical predictions of the results, similar to
> the published charged pions results, and just because of the complication
> of developing new models of lambda production channel and the time needed
> for it, we were able to convince the PRL referees that is not feasible for
> the timeline of the current publication. In this spirit, as mentioned
> above, I am also curious to know why no theoretical curves are included in
> these results.
>
> - Please define your acronyms and kinematic variables at the first use.
>
> - I believe you will have to remove the sections titles before submitting
> the paper to PRL as I don't think this is the current standard PRL format
> if I am not mistaken (at least titles were not used in the CLAS lambda
> paper and we were not asked to add them!)
>
> - PRL is accepting supplemental material, thus I suggest that you produce
> one similar e.g. to the lambda PRL paper in which you will include all
> \pi^0 invariant mass distributions, results for various kinematical bins,
> description of particle ID, background subtraction of \pi^0 invariant mass,
> corrections, systematic studies and their tables as well as tabulated
> twofold and threefold results of figures 2 and 3. Referring to the thesis
> which some of its results have been updated/changed during the advanced
> analysis review stages is not enough.
>
> Specific Comments:
>
> In the abstract:
> 1) You may consider hyphenating "deep-inelastic" everywhere in this
> manuscript (this is how it was adopted in the lambda paper).
>
> 2) We tend to name the virtual photon energy as the "energy transfer
> $\nu$", as you did later in the 2nd paragraph of the intro., and $z$ as the
> "energy fraction" of the leading hadron. Please make sure to distinguish
> between the two kinematical variables to avoid any confusion.
>
> 3) You may need to consider defining $p_T^2$, similarly to what has been
> done to $z$, at the first use. You may consider writing e.g. in the 5th
> sentence: "....and momentum transverse squared ($p_T^2$) is....."
>
> 4) In the first sentence you wrote threefold without a hyphen thus
> "twofold" may need to be written also without a hyphen here and wherever it
> applies in this manuscript.
>
> Intro First paragraph:
> 1) "....and most recently has been described with a relativistic ....."
>
> 2) We tend to use "$x$" or "$x_B$" to denote the Bjorken scaling variable,
> thus it might be preferable to use one of these two in this paper. Also,
> you may at least name the variable here "...at high Bjorken scaling
> variable "$x_B$"...." and leave its full definition on the second intro.
> paragraph, or you may move ", where "$x_B$" is the fraction of the proton
> momentum carried by the struck quark," to the end of the 1st paragraph and
> remove it from the 2nd paragraph.
>
> Intro 2nd paragraph:
> 1) "....lepton deep-inelastic scattering at high "$x_B$"..."
>
> 2) In the definition of $\nu$ both $E$ and $E'$, the energy of the
> incoming and outgoing electrons, need to be defined. The other option is to
> remove the $\nu$ expression from here completely and keep it till after Eq.
> 1 since you are duplicating the definition of $\nu$ there.
>
> Intro 3rd paragraph:
> 1) I suggest after Eq. 1 to change "Here.." with "where..." without
> capitalizing "w" and put a comma by the end of Eq. 1 to have good
> punctuation for equations as well.
>
> 2) "... in semi-inclusive deep-inelastic scattering (SIDIS) events, which,
> following the virtual photon scattering off the quark,...."
> P.S.: The electron scatters off the target nucleus and exchanges the
> virtual phone that scatters off the quark as e-s don't penetrate the
> nucleus to say they scatter off the quark, isn't it?
>
> 3) "$Q^2$ is the virtual photon four-momentum transfer squared..."
>
> 4) $\nu$, see my previous comment about $\nu$ definition and its
> duplication in the intro. 2nd paragraph
>
> 5) "In the absence of any nuclear effects, this observable is equal to
> unity."
>
> Intro 4th paragraph:
> 1) EMC and CLAS need to be defined at first use in the first sentence
> where facilities are mentioned.
>
> 2) "A comprehensive review can be found in Ref.~[30]."
>
> Experimental Setup & Data Analysis:
> 1st paragraph:
> 1) CLAS was decommissioned as a spectrometer so it's better to use the
> passive voice when referring to its components instead of the present tense
> since it doesn't exist anymore.
>
> 2nd paragraph:
> 1) "...a 2-cm-long liquid-deuterium target ..."
> P.S.: Either use liquid deuterium target or deuterium cryo-target but not
> both as the two terms "liquid" and "cryo" refer to the same thing.
>
> 3rd paragraph:
> 1) "The SIDIS reaction $ e + A -> ...$ is measured, where...."
> 2) "..., events with one scattered electron and at least two photons were
> selected."
>
> 2) The $y$ cut is used in our studies based on previous HERMES results and
> thus it's better to explicitly state that to support its usage by saying
> for example "...to reduce the size of radiative effects on the extracted
> multiplicity ratios based on the HERMES studies [<add HERMES references
> here>]." (you may see the references that were used in lambda paper for
> that).
>
> 3) You are already using $x_B$ as I previously suggested so please unify
> your notations throughout the paper.
>
> 4th paragraph:
> 1) "Electrons are selected by requiring...."
> Please do the same to all other sentences starting with "We..." in this
> paragraph.
>
> 2) Since similar electron ID cuts have been used and published in several
> EG2 papers, I suggest adding those publications by the end of this
> paragraph to facilitate the external PRL review and strengthen the paper
> case in this regard. The suggested papers are listed below in Bibtex
> format.
>
> @article{ElFassi:2012,
>       author         = "El Fassi, L. and others",
>       title          = "{Evidence for the onset of color transparency in
> $\rho^0$
>                          electroproduction off nuclei}",
>       collaboration  = "CLAS",
>       journal        = "Phys. Lett. B",
>       volume         = "712",
>       year           = "2012",
>       pages          = "326-330",
>       doi            = "10.1016/j.physletb.2012.05.019"
> }
>
> @article{Hen_2013,
>         doi = {10.1016/j.physletb.2013.04.011},
>         title={Measurement of transparency ratios for protons from
> short-range correlated pairs},
>         year = 2013,
>         month = {may},
>         publisher = {Elsevier {BV}},
>         volume = {722},
>         number = {1-3},
>         pages = {63--68},
>         author = {O. Hen et al.},
>         journal = {Phys. Lett. B}
> }
>
> @article{Schmookler:2019,
>     author = "Schmookler, B. and others",
>     collaboration = "CLAS",
>     title = "{Modified structure of protons and neutrons in correlated
> pairs}",
>     eprint = "2004.12065",
>     archivePrefix = "arXiv",
>     doi = "10.1038/s41586-019-0925-9",
>     journal = "Nature",
>     volume = "566",
>     number = "7744",
>     pages = "354--358",
>     year = "2019"
> }
>
> @article{Moran:2022,
>   title = {Measurement of charged-pion production in deep-inelastic
> scattering off nuclei with the {CLAS} detector},
>   author = {Mor\'an, S. and Dupr\'e, R. and Hakobyan, H. and Arratia, M.
> and Brooks, W.K. and B\'orquez, A. and El~Alaoui, A. and El~Fassi, L. and
> Hafidi, K. and Mendez, R. and Mineeva, T. and Paul, S.J. and others},
>   collaboration = {CLAS Collaboration},
>   journal = {Phys. Rev. C},
>   volume = {105},
>   issue = {1},
>   pages = {015201},
>   year = {2022},
>   publisher = {American Physical Society},
>   doi = {10.1103/PhysRevC.105.015201},
> }
>
> @article{PhysRevLett.130.142301,
>   title = {First Measurement of $\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Lambda}}$
> Electroproduction off Nuclei in the Current and Target Fragmentation
> Regions},
>   author = {Chetry, T. and El Fassi, L. and others},
>   collaboration = {CLAS Collaboration},
>   journal = {Phys. Rev. Lett.},
>   volume = {130},
>   pages = {142301},
>   year = {2023},
>   month = {Apr},
>   publisher = {American Physical Society},
>   doi = {10.1103/PhysRevLett.130.142301}
> }
>
> 5th paragraph:
> 1) Similarly, please use the passive voice in all sentences starting with
> "We..." in this paragraph too.
>
> 6th paragraph:
> 1) Similarly, please use the passive voice in all sentences starting with
> "We..." in this paragraph too.
>
> 2) Figure 1: Label, use "(GeV)" in both left and right plots. Caption: The
> mass has a unit, so, please use it when referring to ranges, etc, "...first
> on the range 0.03 GeV< $M_{γγ}$ < 0.26 GeV....". May I suggest substituting
> (-5\sigma, +5 \sigma) with $\pm 5\sigma$ as "...and then on the range of
> $\pm 5\sigma$ as indicated..."
>
> 3) "...event mixing technique can be found in Ref.~[34]." The reference to
> supplemental material, as suggested above, can be added here too.
>
> Corrections:
> 3rd paragraph:
>
> 1) The same comment about "We.." sentences in this paragraph.
>
> 2) "The ratio of acceptance correction factors for the electron number
> ratio; i.e., deuterium to solid target, varies from a fraction of percent
> up to  +8\%, while for the $\pi^0$ number ratio; i.e., solid to deuterium
> target,....."
>
> Results and Discussion:
> 1st paragraph:
> 1)"...threefold...."
> 2)"...From Fig. 3, no effective dependence on energy and momentum transfer
> to the system is observed, i.e.,....measurement. However, the $Q^2$ and
> $\nu$ ranges in this study are much less...."
>
> 2nd paragraph:
> 1) "Figure 2 shows...."! Figure is written in full at the beginning of a
> sentence and abbreviated as Fig. in the middle of it.
>
> 3rd paragraph:
> 1) The suppression with $z$ is not observed only for the charged pions but
> also for the lambda baryon from the same CLAS EG2 dataset, thus a statement
> about that as well as its reference should be included here.
>
> 2) GiBUU (Giessen Boltzmann-Uehling-Uhlenbec) acronym should be defined.
>
> 3) Use "the Fermilab E665 experiment [45]" while referring to Ref. [45]
> measurement.
>
> Conclusions:
> 1st paragraph:
> 1) "In this paper, the first differential $\pi^0$ multiplicity ratios
> produced in SIDIS off D, C, Fe, and Pb with a 5.014~GeV electron beam and
> measured with the CLAS detector are presented."
>
> 2) Last paragraph: The diquark speculation was also reported in the CLAS
> lambda PRl paper, so please refer to it too in addition to Ref.~[47] while
> talking about diquark correlations in baryon formation.
>
> References:
>
> 1) Use (HERMES Collaboration), (CLAS Collaboration), (European Muon
> Collaboration), and (E665 Collaboration) for all related references.
>
> 2) Ref. [33]: H.~Hakobyan and W.K. Brooks {\it et al.},....
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/clascomment/attachments/20230529/883d90b2/attachment-0001.html>