CMSPaperReviews < Main

---+ *CMS Papers Reviews: CIT Comments*

   * [[https://twiki.hep.caltech.edu/twiki/bin/view/Main/PaperExo10002][CMS-EXO-10-002]] (Dorian)
   * [[CMS-BPH-10-002-001][CMS-BPH-10-002-001]] (Piotr/Dorian, October 26 2010)<span style="color: dodgerblue;" class="WYSIWYG_COLOR"> __Institutional Review assignment__ </span>
-- Main.smaria - 2010-10-17

Comments from Marat

There are some problems with the PDF: there are lines with <br />no numbers, e.g. on pp. 3 and 5. <br /> <br />Page 3, between lines 99 and 100: <br />How exactly "the dependence of the peak shapes" on muon <br />kinematics was studied, and how large was the associated systematics ? 

<br />Lines 229-232: What was the motivation for Crystal Ball and <br />Crystal Ball+Gaussian for the signal, was the dependence on the <br />background parameterization studied at all ? Only a choice of a <br />second order polynomial is mentioned for the background part. <br />We know that the yield estimation can vary a lot in our pi0 <br />studies. Therefore, this should be explained in more detail. <br />As we can see in Table 3, the "Fit function" is a significant <br />source of systematic uncertainty. <br /> <br />Section 6.1, from the beginning: the method used for separating <br />prompt and non-prompt decays appears to be confusing. As far <br />as know, Chris had some questions about it, so I let him comment.

Overall impression: this is a reasonable paper draft.

This topic: Main > CMSPaperReviews
Topic revision: r2 - 2010-10-26 - marat

Copyright © by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback