<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Volker,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Thanks for getting back to me and considering my comments. Hopefully I have helped things to be</div><div class="">in better shape. I am satisfied with what you have done.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">You had a question in your list that arose from my likely typing too quickly and not seeing what I</div><div class="">had written. On line 96 in the circulated draft you had a sentence containing “statistically-limited”.</div><div class="">There should not be a hyphen between the two words. This is a special case in English with words</div><div class="">ending in “-ly”.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">If you have any questions or need anything else from me, let me know.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Regards,</div><div class="">Daniel</div><div class=""><br class=""><div class="">
<div dir="auto" style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div dir="auto" style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">*****************************************************************************<br class="">*<br class="">* Dr. Daniel Carman <a href="mailto:carman@jlab.org" class="">e-mail: carman@jlab.org</a> <br class="">* Staff Scientist office: (757)-269-5586<br class="">* Jefferson Laboratory web: <a href="http://userweb.jlab.org/~carman" class="">http://userweb.jlab.org/~carman</a><br class="">*<br class=""><div>*****************************************************************************</div><div class=""><br class=""></div></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
<div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Mar 8, 2022, at 8:58 AM, Volker Crede <<a href="mailto:vcrede@fsu.edu" class="">vcrede@fsu.edu</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" class="">
<div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div class="">Dear Daniel,</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Thank you for your comments and efforts that help improve our manuscript. Please see our response to individual issues below.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Best wishes,</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""> Volker</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Jan 31, 2022, at 2:48 PM, Daniel Carman <<a href="mailto:carman@jlab.org" class="">carman@jlab.org</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<div class="">Dear Volker et al.,<br class="">
<br class="">
I have read through the draft of your paper on omega photoproduction and include my comments below. Most of my comments deal with grammar/style, but I have a few comments regarding presentation as well. The results are quite impressive.<br class="">
<br class="">
If you have any questions, let me know.<br class="">
<br class="">
Regards,<br class="">
Daniel<br class="">
---------------------------------------------------------------------------<br class="">
General:<br class="">
- I prefer that there should be no space between a "%" symbol and its value. e.g. Use "58\%”.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""> —> Done.</div>
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">- Throughout, use "liquid-hydrogen target”.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""> —> Done.</div>
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">- You are not consistent with your use of commas in lists. Sometimes you put a comma before<br class="">
the "and" (what is called an Oxford comma - which I prefer) and sometimes you do not. Whatever<br class="">
path you choose in the paper, please be consistent with your notation.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""> —> I went through the paper draft again and tried my best to be consistent with our use of commas. This is not the easiest task for non-native speakers.</div>
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">- You have a notation flip-flop in the paper that is not organically presented. The title and<br class="">
abstract explicitly uses photon energy notation. You then switch back and forth between photon<br class="">
energy and invariant energy W (a quantity that is not defined). Can you not choose one variable<br class="">
and stick with it throughout?<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""> —> I have decided to keep the photon energy notation in the title and in the abstract but added the center-of-mass energy range in parentheses. In my opinion, the photon energy notation will more easily attract the attention of the experimental community.
However, we are now consistently using the more physically meaningful center-of-mass energy <i class="">W</i> throughout the rest of the paper. </div>
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">- The presentation of your cross section figures gave rise to some comments:<br class="">
- You include the statistical uncertainties added in quadrature with the background subtraction<br class="">
method uncertainties. However, the total systematic uncertainty accounting is more than just<br class="">
the background subtraction contribution. You list other uncertainties in lines 236-246, but<br class="">
you have not explicitly stated whether these are all scale-type uncertainties or if some are<br class="">
point-to-point type (e.g. detector acceptance). I would like this clarified. Also, I think it<br class="">
makes sense to explicitly include the overall scale uncertainty factor in the figure captions<br class="">
whenever you mention the plotted error bars on your points.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""> —> I have replaced the word “fractional" in lines 240/241 with “scale-type.” However, in light of the PRL word-count limit, I have decided against including the overall scale uncertainty in the figure captions. The information is in the paper and
in principle, any reader can do the math themselves. I hope this is okay with you. </div>
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class=""> - On figures where you include data points from multiple measurements, the data points should all<br class="">
be the same size. For example, in Fig. 5, the CB-ELSA points are much bigger in size than those<br class="">
from CLAS. I think they should all be the same size. Please review in all figures.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
—> The data points all had the same size but open symbols appeared bigger because of the boundary line thickness. We have now reduced the size of open symbols to 90% which should address this issue.<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class=""> - On figures where you include data points from multiple measurements, you have not made it clear<br class="">
what the error bars on the different points include. You have a statement for the current<br class="">
measurement, but not for the earlier CLAS data or for the CB-ELSA data. To make this comparison<br class="">
meaningful, I also have to know what the scale-type errors are for each dataset. I do not know<br class="">
if this would help with the apparent disagreement of the CB-ELSA data or not.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""> —> I believe this is a reasonable request but as I have mentioned before, we are already slightly above the PRL limit. A full discussion of what the error bars of various other data sets include would go beyond the scope of this paper. For this reason,
we decided not to add these statements in the paper. All references are given and if somebody is interested in explicitly studying cross section discrepancies, they have easy access to the relevant information. </div>
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">Page 1:<br class="">
- Line 11. Use "The $\omega$ mesons were detected ...".<br class="">
- Line 19. Use "... mesons $\rho$, $\omega$, and $\phi$ ...".<br class="">
- Line 21. Use "... and, therefore, these ...".<br class="">
- Line 31. Use "Pomeron".<br class="">
- Line 36. Use "... observables that provide ...".<br class="">
- Line 46. Use "... photon that fluctuates ...".<br class="">
- Line 49. Use "... behavior that can be …".<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""> —> Done (all of the above).</div>
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">- Line 50. The sentence ending "... QCD-inspired two-gluon exchange." needs a reference.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""> —> Still looking for an appropriate reference but it will be included.</div>
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">- Line 52. Use "Pomeron".<br class="">
- Line 59. Typo. Use "separate".<br class="">
- Line 61. Use "... study that also ...".<br class="">
- Line 73. Use "... medium-energy regimes.".<br class="">
- Line 74. Use "In this Letter, …".<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""> —> Done (all of the above).</div>
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">- Line 76. Here you give a photon energy range that differs from the title and abstract.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""> —> The photon energy range is now consistent with the information in the abstract. </div>
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">- Eq.(1). Use "... \to p \omega,~{\rm with}~ \omega \to …".<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""> —> Done.</div>
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">Page 2:<br class="">
- Third line from the top of the left column. Here you use a non-standard notation of $\Theta$.<br class="">
Why can't you use $\theta$?<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""> —> We use $\Theta$ for the meson scattering angle in the center-of-mass frame and $\theta$ for the normal to the three-pion decay plane in the rest frame of the meson. To avoid confusion, we have decided to stick to this notation.</div>
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">- Line 96. Use "statistically meaningful”.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""> —> Can you explain again what you mean here?</div>
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">- Line 111. Here you have "...; they are the first measurements." However, on line 107 you already<br class="">
mentioned that this is the first measurement. Drop the mention on line 111 and end the sentence<br class="">
with a period.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""> —> I have not changed this because “first measurement” refers to different things in both cases. The first statement refers to the extraction of unpolarized SDMEs for -t > 0.6 GeV^2. The second statement refers to the extraction of polarized SDMEs
using circular beam polarization. I have added the word “also” in the second statement.</div>
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">- Fig. 1 x-axis label subscript is too small for readability.<br class="">
- Line 133. Use "... energy $E_\gamma$ as:"<br class="">
- Line 134. Remove "and $E_{e^-}$ is the accelerator energy" as you already defined this on line 124.<br class="">
- Line 157. Use "... sample followed ...".<br class="">
<br class="">
Page 3:<br class="">
- Line 177. Spurious "with" on this line.<br class="">
- Line 181. Use "... subtraction technique [26], ...".<br class="">
- Line 182. Use "... which determined the ...".<br class="">
- Line 192. Use "The value of $Q$ was then ...".<br class="">
- Line 199. Use "... measurements were based on ...".<br class="">
- Line 208. Use "The Monte Carlo events ...".<br class="">
- Line 210. Use "... criteria that were applied ...".<br class="">
- Fig. 2 caption. Line 14. Remove the extra "(" in the list.<br class="">
- Fig. 2 caption. Line 17. Use "(long dash-dotted curve)".<br class="">
- Line 221. Use "... distribution, which indicates ...".<br class="">
<br class="">
Page 4:<br class="">
- Line 238. Use "... in Refs. [20,26].".<br class="">
- Line 244. Use "... liquid-hydrogen density …".<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""> —> Done (all of the above).</div>
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">- Line 252. Provide a reference to the helicity and Adair frames.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""> —> Unfortunately, I haven’t found an appropriate reference, yet.</div>
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">Page 5:<br class="">
- Line 282. Use "... exchanges, as well as ...".<br class="">
- Line 305. Use "... angles, as well as proton ...".<br class="">
- Line 310. Use "... and, consequently, both ...".<br class="">
- Line 329. Use "... the one for $\pi$ exchange.".<br class="">
<br class="">
References:<br class="">
- Do not include the page range for journal references as this is not standard. Of bigger<br class="">
issue is that you are inconsistent with this usage in your bibliography.<br class="">
- Refs. [34] and [35]. Use "[CLAS Collaboration]".<br class="">
<br class="">
Supplementary figures:<br class="">
- Fig. 7 caption. Line 3. Problem with inequality notation.<br class="">
- Fig. 8 caption. Line 3. Problem with inequality notation.<br class="">
- Fig. 9 caption. Line 3. Use "... 4.7~GeV and SLAC [12] ...".<br class="">
- Fig. 20. Line 1. Use "Adair".<br class="">
- Fig. 21. Line 1. Use "Adair”.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
—> Done (all of the above).</div>
<br class="">
</div>
</div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>