[Nuclear] XLASNPA conference contribution

[Hicks, Kenneth]

Hi Will,

I read through your proceedings contribution, and I found the discussion about Fig. 4 to be confusing.  At first, I thought the Pb spectrum was simply shifted and normalized to "unity" (i.e., to have the same integral?).  But when I read further, it says that there is a cut on Feynman x and "taking the putative energy loss into account for the heavy nucleus".  This latter statement is too vague, and it would be helpful if you explain (or give an equation for) what you mean here.  The whole point here is that there is an "optimum shift" but I have no idea how this shift was optimized.

Also, I find the caption to Fig. 5 to be a bit confusing.  From the figure, it appears that Delta E_quark saturates above E_critical, whereas the caption says that the energy loss is quadratic in system length and energy-independent, which means something else to me.  Although I think I know what you want to say here, the wording of the figure caption could be improved (significantly).

I hope these comments are helpful.  Do you still have time to revise the manuscript?

Best regards,
Ken

-----Original Message-----
From: nuclear-bounces at jlab.org [mailto:nuclear-bounces at jlab.org] On Behalf Of William Brooks
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2014 10:19 AM
To: nuclear at jlab.org
Subject: [Nuclear] XLASNPA conference contribution

Dear all, 

I wrote a conference proceedings contribution for the XLASNPA conference in Montevideo, Uruguay. After receiving your comments and suggestions, I would like to post it in revised form on the preprint server. Although my talk was more general and included data from HERMES, CMS, and ATLAS in addition to CLAS, I chose to only highlight CLAS preliminary data in the writeup. Any comments you may have will be appreciated. There is room for more references, for instance.

Best regards, 

- Will