<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="">
Dear Maxime,
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Thanks for considering my comments. Here are few more comments.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;" class="">
<font size="2" class=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;" class=""><i class="">- line 100, “well-reconstructed proton”, can we avoid such statements? What does that mean, what do we want to emphasize that there are not well-reconstructed protons? Why?</i></span></font></div>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;" class="">
<font size="2" class=""><i class=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;" class=""></span></i></font></p>
<font size="2" style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class=""><i class="">=> "well-reconstructed" is implying "after performing quality cuts" (pid + fiducial cuts). A proton going on the edge of DCs may not be well reconstructed. Do you want
us to rephrase a bit? We are at the very limit on the number of words for PRL. I cannot promise that I will not have to come back to well-reconstructed if PRL complains about the length of the article though. <br class="">
</i></font>
<div><b class="">You do perform quality cuts for electron and I am sure for the photon too. But you do not call them “well-reconstructed”. My comment was using that phrase for the proton specifically. How about to rewrite that first sentence as:</b></div>
<div><b class="">“Events with a single high energy electron, a single proton, and at least one photon above 2 GeV reconstructed with quality cuts were considered as BH/DVCS candidates”. </b></div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;" class="">
<font size="2" class=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;" class=""><i class="">- line 182, in the formula, is the mass of N. Can you write M and define it as the mass of the nucleon N.</i></span></font></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;" class="">
<font size="2" class=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;" class=""><i class="">=> N refers to the letter for the 4-momentum of the target proton in Fig1. <br class="">
</i></span></font></div>
<div class=""><b class="">I understand that “N” refers to the nucleon in in Fig.1. But the formula is for x_B and in the formula you should have the mass of N.</b></div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;" class="">
<font size="2" class=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;" class=""><i class="">- line 213, “the kinematics at the vertex” is an incorrect statement. The incoming electron can/will radiate before the interaction (vertex).</i></span></font></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;" class="">
<font size="2" class=""><span style="font-size: 10pt;" class=""><i class="">=> I do not understand your point as I believe the sentence emphasizes indeed the difference between the reconstructed kinematics and the "ones at the vertex" with an incident electron
energy a bit lower than the beam due to soft photon emission, the scattered electron enery a bit higher due to various energy loss processes,...<br class="">
</i></span></font></div>
</div>
<div class=""><font size="2" class=""><b class="">OK, I guess we have different definitions of “vertex”. For me kinematics at the “vertex" means the nominal beam energy and the reconstructed momentum of the scattered electron unaltered. Of course this is not
true at the real production (interaction) vertex for reasons you already explained in the paper.</b></font></div>
<div class=""><font size="2" class=""><br class="">
</font></div>
<div class=""><font size="2" class="">Regards, Stepan </font></div>
</div>
<div><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Sep 14, 2022, at 7:03 AM, DEFURNE Maxime <<a href="mailto:maxime.defurne@cea.fr" class="">maxime.defurne@cea.fr</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class=""><span id="cid:31E0057F-956D-4C14-BC56-A7E75554F924@jlab.org"><DVCS_PRL-stepan.pdf></span></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</div>
</body>
</html>