[Hybrid baryons] Proposal Draft - reorganized
Ralf Gothe
rwgothe at gmail.com
Mon Apr 18 18:52:06 EDT 2016
Dear Dan and Viktor,
here are my suggestions, comments, and rearrangements.
Cheers, Ralf
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:04 AM, Daniel Carman <carman at jlab.org> wrote:
> Ralf,
>
> Whatever is easier for you.
>
> Regards,
> Daniel
>
> On Apr 18, 2016, at 9:48 AM, Ralf Gothe <rwgothe at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Dan,
>
> it has advantages if I implement suggested changes into the pdf file (what
> I already started), since you still will have everything available to you,
> but I also could directly implement them into the tex file.
>
> What would you prefer.
>
> Cheers. Ralf
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Daniel Carman <carman at jlab.org> wrote:
>
>> Ralf,
>>
>> I will wait to hear from you before diving in. Let me know if we need to
>> talk on the phone and we can
>> find a time. If your comments are easily understood from your mark up,
>> then that is fine with me too.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Daniel
>>
>> On Apr 18, 2016, at 9:35 AM, Ralf Gothe <rwgothe at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Daniel,
>>
>> I'm just working on Viktor's last version (sent 12h ago). Since you
>> wanted to start this afternoon and if you don't mind, then I keep doing so
>> and send you either this after noon (let me know if you prefer this option)
>> or before the end of the what I have.
>>
>> Cheers, Ralf
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Annalisa D'Angelo <
>> annalisa.dangelo at roma2.infn.it> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Daniel,
>>> thank you for your very active and useful contribution.
>>> I fully agree on your proposal. Please get in contact also with Ralph
>>> who I had asked to review the same Sections
>>> last Saturday.
>>>
>>> My intention is indeed to "complete" one chapter per day, starting from
>>> 3.3 and send them to the collaboration for general comments and to you for
>>> the review.
>>> If the work will proceed as hoped we should be in a better shape by next
>>> meeting.
>>>
>>> All the best
>>> Annalisa
>>>
>>>
>>> Il 18/04/16 14:46, Daniel Carman ha scritto:
>>>
>>> Annalisa,
>>>>
>>>> Victor did some further work on the early sections of the proposal this
>>>> weekend after I sent around
>>>> my comments. He sent his updates to me for comment and I think they are
>>>> reasonable. Based on
>>>> what is now available for the introductory parts of the proposal, I
>>>> would propose that we freeze the
>>>> first part of the proposal (Section 1 through Section 3.2) so that I
>>>> can begin to polish it. That way I
>>>> don’t have to deal with editing all 70 pages over just a couple of days
>>>> this weekend. Let me know
>>>> if you agree and I will begin my work.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Daniel
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 17, 2016, at 12:58 PM, Annalisa D'Angelo <
>>>>> annalisa.dangelo at roma2.infn.it> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Daniel,
>>>>> Thank you!!
>>>>> Annalisa
>>>>>
>>>>> Il 17/04/16 18:52, Daniel Carman ha scritto:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Annalisa et al.,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have just finished reading the available draft of the hybrid baryon
>>>>>> proposal that was circulated yesterday. I have extensively
>>>>>> marked up my copy, but I wanted today to share only my “highest"
>>>>>> level of comments as we work to shape a "presentable”
>>>>>> version of this proposal to meet the CLAS Collaboration review
>>>>>> deadline of next Monday.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) The proposal as it stands, while still rough and hastily written
>>>>>> in some areas, is not all that bad. In fact, I am certain that we
>>>>>> can converge this week on a draft that will represent us well for the
>>>>>> collaboration review.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2) One area of weakness that needs to be addressed is that there are
>>>>>> no references to the extensive existing measurements
>>>>>> published by CLAS for KY electroproduction. These measurements needs
>>>>>> to be described in some level of detail and proper
>>>>>> references included. I can provide this part along with references.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3) The two existing elements of the CLAS12 N* program (E12-09-003 and
>>>>>> E12-06-108A) should be described somewhere in
>>>>>> the introduction in a concise fashion with appropriate references.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 4) The proposal draft will need extensive clean-up with respect to
>>>>>> grammar, syntax, and style. As I will be responsible for this,
>>>>>> I would like to get the “frozen” proposal draft (and all files) no
>>>>>> later than Friday afternoon (Apr. 22) so that I can complete this
>>>>>> work over the weekend. I will finish my work by Apr. 24 and send the
>>>>>> draft to the hybrid group for a final chance to look at it
>>>>>> before submission on Apr. 25.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 5) Section 3. I found the "Old Version" much better written and more
>>>>>> complete than the paragraphs that follow in the “New
>>>>>> Version". I propose to keep the text highlighted in blue and to
>>>>>> delete the text on pp. 12 and 13 starting from "As discussed in
>>>>>> section 2.2, according ...” until "... channels such as $\phi(1020N$,
>>>>>> $K^+\Lambda$.".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 6) The first bullet of Section 3.1 makes no sense to me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 7) Explain the curves on Fig. 7 and Fig. 8.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 8) Section 3.3. At the top of pp. 20 is a bit about "In collaboration
>>>>>> with the JPAC ..." that does not seem to fit. Lots of words but the
>>>>>> relevance to the discussion does not seem to fit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 9) Section 5. The intro paragraph is all about KY and should be moved
>>>>>> to Section 6.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 10) The acceptance of CLAS12 for eppi+pi- and eK+ppi- can be
>>>>>> misleading if a proper cut on the momentum for low momentum
>>>>>> tracks in the Central Detector is not considered. The minimum
>>>>>> momentum tracks accepted by the CTOF is ~300 MeV. Is there a
>>>>>> pmin cut in effect?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 11) Section 5.4. The second paragraph here makes no sense to me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 12) What is the purpose of Fig. 21? It should be better integrated
>>>>>> into the text and redone with I=-3375A torus current.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 13) Replace Fig. 25 and Fig. 26 with I=+/-3375 A for the torus.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 14) Section 6.3. This business about "Lambda Separation %” and
>>>>>> "Sigma0 Separation %" should be eliminated. For cross section
>>>>>> observables the hyperons can be separated with a proper line-shape
>>>>>> analysis such as has been done in our existing CLAS
>>>>>> publications. So, remove the vertical lines on Figs. 27 and 28 and
>>>>>> eliminate this discussion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 15) Section 6.4. Rate estimates should be shown only for final torus
>>>>>> current choice of -3375 A. All of the other conditions listed only
>>>>>> serve to distract.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 16) Section 6. Somewhere in the section a crisp argument has to be
>>>>>> made about value added at running at both 6.6 GeV and 8.8 GeV.
>>>>>> What are the different kinematic ranges accessible at each beam
>>>>>> energy and why are these different ranges essential for a successful
>>>>>> experiment?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 17) Section 7. Nowhere are the different observables that will be
>>>>>> measured succinctly laid out, especially for K+Y. The plan is to measure
>>>>>> the differential cross sections and to separate the structure
>>>>>> functions sigU, sigLT, sigTT, and possible sigLT', as well as to measure the
>>>>>> induced and transferred hyperon polarization. This needs to be
>>>>>> clearly discussed and why these observables are important. Also it needs
>>>>>> to be mentioned that the interference structure functions and
>>>>>> polarization observables might be even more sensitive to hybrid baryons
>>>>>> that measurements of differential cross sections alone. Certainly
>>>>>> they can only add additional sensitivity in the search for new baryon
>>>>>> states (hybrid or conventional). These observables and their
>>>>>> potential sensitivities are not really mentioned or discussed at all in the
>>>>>> proposal.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 18) Section 7.6. The discussion here is a bit muddy and misleading.
>>>>>> Table 5 shows the minimal value of the A1/2 electrocouplings vs. Q2,
>>>>>> but under the condition that only the scattered electron is used to
>>>>>> define the trigger. A tepid statement is made that with a two- or
>>>>>> three-prong trigger this minimal value improves. I think that some
>>>>>> additional table must be included on what this improvement is with
>>>>>> our expected trigger condition for the experiment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 19) Section 7.7. Replace Tables 7 and 8 with values for I=-3375 A
>>>>>> torus current.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 20) Replace Figs. 34, 35, 36, 37 with I=-3375 A torus current.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 21) Section 7.8 needs some attention to introduce this approach to
>>>>>> define our sensitivity to finding hybrids. This includes mentioned the
>>>>>> use of this chi-squared approach from Bonn-Gatchina. The section
>>>>>> should also be expanded following Volker' recent suggestion of
>>>>>> scanning the chi-squared space assuming different quantum numbers for
>>>>>> the resonance than were used to generate it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 22) Section 8. The justification of the 30 days at each beam energy
>>>>>> needs to be made more complete. We need to carefully define our
>>>>>> statistical requirements based on a certain minimum threshold value
>>>>>> for the hybrid electrocoupling. The running time needs to be justified
>>>>>> showing how the minimum electrocoupling value increases as a function
>>>>>> of reduced beam time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 23) Page 59. Figs. 39 and 40 are not referenced in the text.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 24) Section 9. The summary should include explicit mention to the two
>>>>>> existing elements of the CLAS12 N* program, E12-09-003 and
>>>>>> E12-06-108A, at 11 GeV.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 25) Are Appendices A and B needed for this proposal? This is fairly
>>>>>> elementary stuff. If deemed to be helpful to the proposal, the formalism
>>>>>> section on KY should follow what I have developed as the RPR
>>>>>> formalism is based on what I have defined in our published KY papers from
>>>>>> CLAS.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let me know if folks have any questions or comments on this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Daniel
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ***********************************************************************************
>>>>>> *
>>>>>> *
>>>>>> * Dr. Daniel S. Carman e-mail : carman at jlab.org
>>>>>> *
>>>>>> * Staff Scientist office :
>>>>>> (757)-269-5586 *
>>>>>> * Jefferson Laboratory web:
>>>>>> http://userweb.jlab.org/~carman *
>>>>>> *
>>>>>> *
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ***********************************************************************************
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Hybrid_baryons mailing list
>>>>>> Hybrid_baryons at jlab.org
>>>>>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hybrid_baryons
>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> ================================================
>>>>> Prof. Annalisa D'Angelo
>>>>> Dip. Fisica, Universita' di Roma "Tor Vergata"
>>>>> INFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata, Rome Italy
>>>>> email:annalisa.dangelo at roma2.infn.it
>>>>> Jefferson Laboratory, Newport News, VA USA
>>>>> Email: annalisa at jlab.org
>>>>> Tel: + 39 06 72594562
>>>>> Fax: + 39 06 2040309
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Hybrid_baryons mailing list
>>>>> Hybrid_baryons at jlab.org
>>>>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hybrid_baryons
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ***********************************************************************************
>>>> *
>>>> *
>>>> * Dr. Daniel S. Carman e-mail : carman at jlab.org
>>>> *
>>>> * Staff Scientist office : (757)-269-5586
>>>> *
>>>> * Jefferson Laboratory web:
>>>> http://userweb.jlab.org/~carman *
>>>> *
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>> ***********************************************************************************
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Hybrid_baryons mailing list
>>>> Hybrid_baryons at jlab.org
>>>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hybrid_baryons
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> ================================================
>>> Prof. Annalisa D'Angelo
>>> Dip. Fisica, Universita' di Roma "Tor Vergata"
>>> INFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata, Rome Italy
>>> email:annalisa.dangelo at roma2.infn.it
>>> Jefferson Laboratory, Newport News, VA USA
>>> Email: annalisa at jlab.org
>>> Tel: + 39 06 72594562
>>> Fax: + 39 06 2040309
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Hybrid_baryons mailing list
>>> Hybrid_baryons at jlab.org
>>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hybrid_baryons
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Prof. Ralf W. Gothe
>> Department of Physics and Astronomy
>> University of South Carolina
>> Columbia, SC 29208
>>
>> Phone: 803 777 9025
>> Fax: 803 777 3065
>> _______________________________________________
>> Hybrid_baryons mailing list
>> Hybrid_baryons at jlab.org
>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hybrid_baryons
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ***********************************************************************************
>> *
>> *
>> * Dr. Daniel S. Carman e-mail : carman at jlab.org
>> *
>> * Staff Scientist office : (757)-269-5586
>> *
>> * Jefferson Laboratory web:
>> http://userweb.jlab.org/~carman *
>> *
>> *
>> ***********************************************************************************
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Hybrid_baryons mailing list
>> Hybrid_baryons at jlab.org
>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hybrid_baryons
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Prof. Ralf W. Gothe
> Department of Physics and Astronomy
> University of South Carolina
> Columbia, SC 29208
>
> Phone: 803 777 9025
> Fax: 803 777 3065
>
>
>
>
> ***********************************************************************************
> *
> *
> * Dr. Daniel S. Carman e-mail : carman at jlab.org
> *
> * Staff Scientist office : (757)-269-5586
> *
> * Jefferson Laboratory web:
> http://userweb.jlab.org/~carman *
> *
> *
> ***********************************************************************************
>
>
>
--
Prof. Ralf W. Gothe
Department of Physics and Astronomy
University of South Carolina
Columbia, SC 29208
Phone: 803 777 9025
Fax: 803 777 3065
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/hybrid_baryons/attachments/20160418/2f4504ab/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: upto-chapter-3-rg.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 1335741 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/hybrid_baryons/attachments/20160418/2f4504ab/attachment-0001.pdf>
More information about the Hybrid_baryons
mailing list