[Hps] Second round of collaboration review of our first physics paper

[Maurizio Ungaro]

Dera all,

I approve.

Mauri


On Jul 24, 2018, at 6:17 AM, osipenko <Mikhail.Osipenko at ge.infn.it> wrote:

Thank you Stepan for sending the PDF!

I approve the draft, and I have few suggestions:

1) page.1 after Eq.1 - use "dimensionless" parameter;

2) end of page 1 - at least to me the statement about "quantum effects" is not clear, are these simple loops of heavy particles? Then perhaps you may mention here the masses of these particles that you expect indicating the range of epsilon;

3) page 2 second paragraph - you mention mass range up to 500 MeV, but never justify why you covered only <81 MeV, although one may guess that it is matter of statistics, but I would suggest put it explicitly into the text somewhere...;

4) beginning of Section IV - I would suggest "We expect a heavy photon to appear as a Gaussian-shaped resonance...";
5) page 4 previous to last line - perhaps 0.5 MeV not .05, right?

6) Eq.3 - alpha is undefined,
7) page 5 previous to last sentence before section VI - "systematic" is a jargon, twice serial "due to", rephrase like "When scaling...the primary systematic uncertainty is..."

8) same place - in Fig.3 the limits using "all statistical and systematic uncertainties" are shown, actually (if contribution of systematic errors is significant) you may provide a better insight on the results by providing also statistical contribution only (e.g. adding on the plot another area under the cyan), in this way a reader can figure out if you will gain something running more beam time or the result is already dominated by systematics and no further improvement is possible regardless new runs. It may give a basis to state that "running for more beam-time we will get much more precise limits" (or not)...
Best Regards,

                           Mikhail.


On 07/23/2018 11:11 PM, Stepan Stepanyan wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> Apparently not everyone has an up-to-date account to access th econfluence page, so I am sending the draft in the attachment. Rules are the same you send your comments to the mailing list (hps at jlab.org <mailto:hps at jlab.org>) with your vote of approval.
> 
> Regards, Stepan
> 
> 
> 
>> On Jul 18, 2018, at 5:16 PM, Stepan Stepanyan <stepan.g.stepanyan at gmail.com <mailto:stepan.g.stepanyan at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> Dear HPS,
>> 
>> Draft of the 2015 resonance search paper is ready for the second round of review, see link below. All the comments received as of yesterday have been taken care. Please read and send additional comments you may have to the HPS mailing list (hps at jlab.org <mailto:hps at jlab.org>). This collaboration review period is for one week (according to our amended bylaws). 
>> 
>> After one week, eob next Wednesday, July 25, a new, final version of the draft will be generated. According to our bylaws the final version must be approval by EC and PPC, and then collaboration will be asked to vote. But since we have been delayed enough and the draft has been around so long, I want to ask you to send your vote along with your comments, if any, or just a vote if no comments.
>> 
>> After all formalities are satisfied and collaboration voted in favor, paper will be posed on arxiv and will be sent to the target journal (PRD rapid communications).   
>> 
>> https://confluence.slac.stanford.edu/display/hpsg/Analyses?preview=/211791152/238552527/engrun2015_resonance_search_prd_rapid_v2pt0.pdf <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__confluence.slac.stanford.edu_display_hpsg_Analyses-3Fpreview-3D_211791152_238552527_engrun2015-5Fresonance-5Fsearch-5Fprd-5Frapid-5Fv2pt0.pdf&d=DwMFAg&c=lz9TcOasaINaaC3U7FbMev2lsutwpI4--09aP8Lu18s&r=hGEVsUzUB5ml8iDt6EuOdg&m=R-rHn_pKkMCcyM_DkDp4yZ-t2LC9SiC7nTaZoeMVnJ4&s=mWxsQZmIQWRZAkZgAF-gcXTCodSD_y0LAN4nM8mpq4o&e=>
>> 
>> Regards, Stepan
>> _______________________________________________
>> Hps mailing list
>> Hps at jlab.org <mailto:Hps at jlab.org>
>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hps <https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hps>
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Hps mailing list
> Hps at jlab.org <mailto:Hps at jlab.org>
> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hps <https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hps>

_______________________________________________
Hps mailing list
Hps at jlab.org
https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hps

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/hps/attachments/20180724/722a3617/attachment.html>