CMS Papers Reviews: CIT Comments

• CMS-EXO-10-002 (Dorian)
• CMS-BPH-10-002-001 (Piotr/Dorian, October 26 2010) Institutional Review assignment

Comments from Marat

There are some problems with the PDF: there are lines with
no numbers, e.g. on pp. 3 and 5.

Page 3, between lines 99 and 100:
How exactly "the dependence of the peak shapes" on muon
kinematics was studied, and how large was the associated systematics ?

Lines 229-232: What was the motivation for Crystal Ball and
Crystal Ball+Gaussian for the signal, was the dependence on the
background parameterization studied at all ? Only a choice of a
second order polynomial is mentioned for the background part.
We know that the yield estimation can vary a lot in our pi0
studies. Therefore, this should be explained in more detail.
As we can see in Table 3, the "Fit function" is a significant
source of systematic uncertainty.

Section 6.1, from the beginning: the method used for separating
prompt and non-prompt decays appears to be confusing. As far
as know, Chris had some questions about it, so I let him comment.

Overall impression: this is a reasonable paper draft.