Questa è una vecchia versione del documento!
http://cms.cern.ch/cds/B2G-12-015
Per ora solo nel link: https://cds.cern.ch/record/1603150
Stefano C.
TYPE B:
The paper is well written even though the analysis is quite complicated. Nevertheless the readability can be improved with a better description of the event samples and the channels involved in the analysis.
- For instance, it is not always clear which event sample is targeting which final state of the TT decay. One way of making it more clear would be to add a table with all the samples considered, the summary of the cuts applied to target specific final states etc.
- Another point is the following: how is the Higgs decay treated? In lines 65-66 the authors say that the decay of the Higgs is incusive assuming SM BRs: this is a clear statement about the MC samples used, but there is no mention on the strategy for “tagging” the Higgs in the data samples. How is the sample enriched in T→tH is not really explained, while it is clear how you are tagging W (leptons+MET, W-jets) or b-quark (CSV).
TYPE A:
Abstract
- “accumulated” → “collected”
Main Body
- L 14-28: consider putting a figure with a Feynman diagram of the processes involved
- L 20: what does “democratic” mean in this context?
- L 107-108: not sure that the reader wants to know efficiency and purity of b-tagging algorithm with such a precision
- L 110-112: it is not 100% clear the way you apply this additional jet-analysis and the interplay with the standard jet-recobstruction using the anti-kt algorithm. Please rephrase or add a statement to clarify
- L 145-148: the procedure is not clear to me. Furthermore: “initially” refers to what? If “initially” then also “finally” or “in a second step” should appear somewhere… Please rephrase this part
Figure 1
- consider using a different color for the pulls in the bottom, since it's exactly the same as the top background above
- where does the uncertainty come from? Statistics + systematics on the normalization? Add a line in the caption
- L 155-159: rephrase to avoid repetition
Table 2
- remove the arrow after lepton flavor
- L 175: consider removing “four”, since in the following lines (until L 183) the reader can find only 3 categories