<div dir="ltr"><div>Dear Dan,</div><div><br></div><div>Thank you for carefully reading through the paper, pointing to the grammar fixes and providing valuable comments. All of your comments were implemented, and questions are clarified below. I attach the new version of the paper draft. Please, let me know if you have further comments.</div><div><br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Page2: </blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
- Paragraph 4. Line 5. "it was placed 30 and 25 cm upstream of the CLAS center". I cannot make sense<br>
of what you are saying here. What do the values 30 cm and 25 cm represent? You just stated in the<br>
previous sentence that the liquid and solid targets were separated by 4 cm. Please review.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>The deuterium target was 2cm long and the center of the target was placed 30 cm upstream CLAS center. Yes, it was not clear that the position referred to the center of the target. </div><div>The 4cm separation is then between the end of the deuterium target and the solid targets. </div><div><br></div><div>I received a similar comment from Stepan. Sentence rephrased. </div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Page 3:<br>
- Fig. 1. I do not think that the right figure showing just the background adds anything of value and<br>
could be eliminated altogether.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I tend to agree with you on the non-usefulness of the right figure depicting solely the background shape; it was not in the first version of the paper draft but we added it later. The point was to show how the mixed background shape is fitted with a 5 parameter function (right figure); the predetermined shape is then normalized by only free parameter of background, p[0], (left figure) to fit the background under the invariant mass. I did not remove the background plot from this version of the draft but we are considering your comment, thank you.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
- Paragraph 3. Line 2. Use "... was fit with a ...".<br></blockquote><div> </div><div>Since APS is the publisher of PRL, I see that I should indeed use American English for the past tense of 'fit'! The 'fitted' is the British English version.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Page 4:<br>
- Fig. 2. I cannot distinguish between your slightly different shades of red, blue, and green. I am also<br>
not a fan of the different colored horizontal bands of bin width that just add business and little content.<br>
Perhaps it is better to use different color symbols and symbol types for the z bins on each plot and use<br>
a gray scale for the bin widths. The detail about the different bin widths for each PT2 is not so important<br>
to reflect on the plot, so I would use a single light gray band for the PT2 bin width of each bin.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Considering the gradient scale of Fig.2 in red, blue and green shades, I see your point, thank you. I am attaching the previous color scale, which was in the paper draft approved by CLAS committee review. Let me know, please, what do you think, whether it appears more readable.</div><div> <br>In general, the message that this plot should convey is the correlation between z and pT2 dependencies of multiplicity ratios. The gradient scale, in our opinion, allows one to easily distinguish between high-z events, which are indicated by the darker scale, relative to low-z events indicated by lighter scale. Darker points are visibly more supressed compared to the lighter events that are enhanced. For the horizontal bands, I understand what you mean by more business less content; we included them to indicate the size of bins, but more so to guide the eye through the transition from one bin to another. We are considering the possibility of removing them, thanks.</div><div><br></div><div> As far as using different symbols for different z-bins, it could be an option but on this plot it gets too crowded and harder to follow the trend as compared to the color indications. <br></div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
- Paragraph 1. Line 13. "-17\% to +8\% above unity". What do you mean by "above unity"? Is this term even<br>
necessary here?<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div> Good point. Given the minus/plus signs of the corrections, the 'above unity' is not necessary; removed everywhere.</div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Page 5:<br>
- Fig. 3. This figure is absolutely unreadable to me in its current form. There has got to be a better way<br>
to convey this information. The symbols on each postage stamp plot are utter unreadable and the text<br>
legend at the both is of such a small font size as to make one's eyes go cross. If your point is that<br>
the different points in each z bin for each target are similar, perhaps just show an average. If that is<br>
not acceptable, remove the statistic error bars as the box outline conveys this message. You have to do<br>
something to make this more digestible and less busy.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>We tested numerous ways to present data, both on Fig.2 and Fig.3, and the final decision is based upon the message that is conveyed in each figure. Here, the main message is conveyed by the color bands in red, blue and green which indicate the average behavior as a function of z. The 'cluttering' of points is to show that we could access three-fold behavior in nu and Q2 as a function of z, but the dependencies on electron kinematics are weak and are within uncertainties indicated by the box. </div><div><br></div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
- Question: As model calculations (especially GiBUU) should be available or can be done, this paper seems<br>
deficient with no theory comparisons. You have some hand-wavy discussions, but these are no so impressive<br>
without the calculations included here. I think this lack of theory detracts from this work.<br></blockquote><div> </div><div>We purposely did not include any model predictions in this paper, publishing it à la HERMES (2011) two-fold results: <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1140/epja/i2011-11113-5" target="_blank">https://link.springer.com/article/10.1140/epja/i2011-11113-5</a>.</div><div>Yes, preliminary GiBUU predictions on pi0 exist, they were done along with charged pions predictions published earlier. However, they do not explain the difference in Cronin effect between pi0 and charged pions that we observe in our data. Nor does the other model (Guiot-Kopeliovich) used in charged pion publication; it does not contain ingredients that would differentiate between three pion states. We intend to collect a larger body of model predictions to publish a conclusive explanation. Our 'hand-wavy' discussions are based on general principles of the interplay of partonic and hadronic interaction in nuclei. Finally, the target journal is PRL, it has a limit of 3650 words.</div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
References:<br>
- Do not include arXiv information for already published papers.<br></blockquote><div> </div><div>I prefer to include arXiv references, at least for now, since not all the institutions have free access to all the journals, arXiv is accessible to everyone. </div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Many thanks again, and best regards,</div><div>Taisiya</div><div> </div><div> </div></div></div>