Differenze
Queste sono le differenze tra la revisione selezionata e la versione attuale della pagina.
Entrambe le parti precedenti la revisione Revisione precedente Prossima revisione | Revisione precedente | ||
cms:cms-egm-13-001 [17/11/2014 08:41] maselli |
cms:cms-egm-13-001 [17/11/2014 08:44] (versione attuale) maselli |
||
---|---|---|---|
Linea 3: | Linea 3: | ||
**Commenti di Marco C** | **Commenti di Marco C** | ||
- | kkkkk | + | The paper is too long and hard to read although its physical content is quite good |
+ | |||
+ | The language is often too much "cms slang" with expressions not of general | ||
+ | understanding outside CMS | ||
+ | |||
+ | It has still the structure of an analysis note as it collects a list of useful and | ||
+ | important informations but as a paper it should be more synthetic and coherent | ||
+ | |||
+ | giving to a reader the possibility to select the relevant numbers, that should be | ||
+ | for example summarised at the end of each main section. | ||
+ | |||
+ | More emphasis should be put into linking the performance of the electron | ||
+ | reconstruction and selection with the main CMS analysis papers where | ||
+ | these numbers are used to build up the systematics | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | More work is needed to make it mature to be published | ||
**Commenti di Stefano A** | **Commenti di Stefano A** | ||
+ | |||
+ | The Torino group would like to acknowledge the authors for this extensive and | ||
+ | detailed documentation of electron reconstruction in CMS. The task was not a trivial | ||
+ | one, given the complexity and the multifaceted nature of the problem and the many | ||
+ | slightly different ways in which various analyses exploited the available tools for | ||
+ | reconstruction, identification and selections of electrons. | ||
+ | |||
+ | However, the reading of the CWR draft left us with a few serious concerns (Type B | ||
+ | comments): | ||
+ | |||
+ | 1. We are afraid the use of scientific English in this document does not quite meet | ||
+ | the CMS standards required for a journal paper submission. Grammar is shaky, | ||
+ | repetitions can be often avoided, symbols and quantities are not always properly | ||
+ | defined and in several occasions the text is simply incomprehensible. We warmly | ||
+ | suggest a careful reading of the excellent guidelines for preparing CMS publications | ||
+ | available at https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/CMS/Internal/PubGuidelines . | ||
+ | |||
+ | 2. Connected to the above, the manuscript is very technical, which perhaps | ||
+ | facilitated excessive use of CMS jargon. CMS jargon should be completely removed | ||
+ | before going to FR. With this respect, the document as it stands is a very good CMS | ||
+ | Analysis Note, but unacceptable for a journal publication. | ||
+ | |||
+ | 3. The document is very long. We feel there are several opportunities to make it | ||
+ | more terse by avoiding repeated text and concepts. Also, the number of figures could | ||
+ | be reduced either by merging several plots into one or by avoiding showing many | ||
+ | flavours of the same plot (e.g. when showing efficiencies for several working | ||
+ | points). | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | Below we provide some suggestions. We started by providing line-by-line comments, | ||
+ | but realised it was an impossible task within the given time : after a couple | ||
+ | sections we marked only the most important problems. We are sure the LE has a lot | ||
+ | of useful comments and can help making this a top-quality paper. | ||
+ | |||
+ | A curiosity : the residual trend in pt in Fig 15 left is ascribed to the fitting | ||
+ | function. We believe the fitting function should bias simulation and data in the | ||
+ | same way, so we are left wondering if the explanation is sound. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | Good luck for the implementation of comments and FR ! | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | Type A comments : | ||
+ | |||
+ | Abstract: | ||
+ | |||
+ | “A few 100 GeV” - A few hundreds GeV | ||
+ | |||
+ | “cluster energy in the calorimeter” -> the word “cluster" is jargon and must be | ||
+ | defined or avoided | ||
+ | |||
+ | “combining the measured energy in the calorimeter and the measured momentum in the | ||
+ | tracker” -> combining the energy measurement in the calorimeter with the momentum | ||
+ | measurement in the tracker. | ||
+ | |||
+ | “The observed distributions of relevant observables are found to be well reproduced | ||
+ | through Monte Carlo simulation” -> The spectra of the observables relevant to | ||
+ | electron reconstruction are well reproduced in Monte Carlo simulations, as well as | ||
+ | selection and reconstruction efficiencies. | ||
+ | |||
+ | “The data to simulation efficiency ratios …” -> We suggest to remove this convoluted | ||
+ | sentence. | ||
+ | |||
+ | “The effective energy resolution .. changes “ -> The energy resolution [you don’t | ||
+ | explain what “effective” means just yet] for electrons produced in Z decays ranges | ||
+ | from 1.7% to 4.5%, depending on pseudorapidity and energy losses via bremsstrahlung | ||
+ | radiation. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Introduction: | ||
+ | |||
+ | L27: “such as those ..” -> such as Higgs searches and properties, standard model | ||
+ | precision measurements and searches for new physics. | ||
+ | |||
+ | L30 : "the basics .. established for” Rephrase, suggestion: The basic principles | ||
+ | of offline electron reconstruction in CMS were outlined in the PTDR (ref), and rely | ||
+ | on the combination of the energy measurement performed by the Electromagnetic | ||
+ | Calorimeter (ECAL) and of the momentum measurement performed by the silicon tracker. | ||
+ | This strategy delivers optimal performances over a wide range of transverse momentum | ||
+ | (pt). | ||
+ | |||
+ | L32-33: consequently, remove this repetition (you already said the reconstruction | ||
+ | combines E(ECAL)/p(TK)) | ||
+ | |||
+ | L34: “In this paper .. means” -> Throughout the paper, “energy” and “momentum” are | ||
+ | used to refer to the energy of the electromagnetic shower initiated by the electron | ||
+ | in ECAL and track momentum measurement in the tracker, respectively, while the term | ||
+ | “electron energy” is used to refer to the combined information. | ||
+ | |||
+ | L36 There is no such thing as “the performance of the energy calibration” . | ||
+ | Suggestion: ”The performance of ECAL in terms of calibration precision and | ||
+ | resolution was reported in Ref , while track reconstruction is discussed in Ref 5 | ||
+ | |||
+ | L38 “were some aspects .. also discussed” : drop | ||
+ | |||
+ | L40 “performance of the resolution” , again there is no such thing. Suggestion: “In | ||
+ | this paper, electron reconstruction algorithms are described and their performance | ||
+ | in terms of resolution, accuracy and identification capabilities is discussed, based | ||
+ | on 19.7 fb-1 of data … " | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | L44 “The needs for electron performance ..” Electron performance cannot “need” | ||
+ | anything. Rephrase. Suggestion: “The cutting-edge physics analyses foreseen by the | ||
+ | CMS scientific program demand high electron reconstruction and selection efficiency, | ||
+ | small misidentification probability, and high accuracy and precision of the energy | ||
+ | measurement over a large pt range.“ | ||
+ | | ||
+ | L46-7 “The most challenging physical process is the Higgs ..“ this is not at all | ||
+ | true, as there is a plethora of low-energy decays which would be far more | ||
+ | challenging. Suggestion “A crucial and challenging physical process to study, which | ||
+ | is used as a benchmark in the present report, is the decay of the Higgs into four | ||
+ | electrons or two muons and two electrons, where one of the electrons can have a pt | ||
+ | as low as 5 GeV. At the other extreme, electrons with pt above ..." | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | L52 “Fig 1 shows the overall “ -> “Fig 1 shows the full-range spectrum of | ||
+ | uncorrected dielectron invariant-mass derived from data collected using [remove | ||
+ | “relatively”] high pt dielectric triggers. | ||
+ | |||
+ | L53 “No correction … to these data” drop, it can be replaced by using the adjective | ||
+ | “uncorrected” in the sentence above. If you really want to be specific, add | ||
+ | “uncorrected for efficiency” at the end of the previous sentence. | ||
+ | |||
+ | L54 : “The drop of the spectrum” , well, it’s arguably an increase rather than a | ||
+ | drop, unless you look backwards ! Suggest : “The step around 40 GeV” , or “the | ||
+ | feature around 40 GeV" | ||
+ | |||
+ | L58 : remove “in front of the calorimeter” | ||
+ | |||
+ | L59 : “the tracker material … lead to significant emission of bremsstrahlung “ -> “ | ||
+ | cause significant bremsstrahlung emission along..” | ||
+ | |||
+ | L64: Add the sentence: ” The paper is organised as follows” | ||
+ | L69 : “are shown” -> are presented | ||
+ | |||
+ | Caption to Fig 1 : -> “The full-range spectrum of uncorrected dielectron invariant | ||
+ | mass ..” Drop “ No correction .." | ||
+ | |||
+ | Section 2 | ||
+ | Line 80: the new CMS publication rules allow dropping the definition of pseudorapidity | ||
+ | |||
+ | L80-85: very convoluted. Just say how the coordinate system is defined, and then | ||
+ | that its center can be placed either in the geometrical center of the detector or in | ||
+ | a primary vertex (we believe this is what you mean ?). A direction cannot be | ||
+ | measured relative to a point, this is plain wrong. | ||
+ | |||
+ | L83 : “unless specified to the contrary” -> unless otherwise specified | ||
+ | |||
+ | L90-91 : “offering for eta<2.5 an active detection region (the acceptance) “ : | ||
+ | sorry, what ? | ||
+ | |||
+ | L101:" A consequence of the silicon tracker” -> “A consequence of the presence of | ||
+ | the silicon tracker” | ||
+ | |||
+ | L107-109: these concepts have already been discussed in L58. | ||
+ | | ||
+ | In summary, we wonder if Section 2 could be made shorter, since it does not really | ||
+ | say anything new. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Section 3 | ||
+ | |||
+ | L143 “in a fixed time interval of less than 4 us” -> in 3.6 us | ||
+ | |||
+ | L146-157: please rewrite this paragraph explaining properly what a trigger tower is, | ||
+ | defining “cluster”, etc. | ||
+ | |||
+ | L 158-160 : the sentence says nothing, the reader does not know what a L1 or HLT | ||
+ | electron candidate is. | ||
+ | |||
+ | L 165 “unbiased sample relative to the consider efficiency” not clear | ||
+ | |||
+ | L167 “cluster in the ECAL that forms an invariant mass with the first electron” a | ||
+ | cluster does not form an invariant mass | ||
+ | |||
+ | L173 drop the word “dedicated” | ||
+ | |||
+ | L177 “their results compared to evaluate the systematic uncertainties” : please | ||
+ | clarify. The results from MadGraph and Powheg are compared with each other ? Which | ||
+ | systematics are evaluated ? | ||
+ | |||
+ | L184 after .. reweighting good agreement is found “ isn’t this obvious form the | ||
+ | definition of reweighing ? | ||
+ | |||
+ | L195 “previous bunch crossings” : previous to what ? | ||
+ | |||
+ | Section 4 | ||
+ | |||
+ | L 197 “a track in the tracker” -> a track reconstructed in the silicon detector | ||
+ | L 197 “ a cluster of energy” : we believe “cluster” was never properly defined | ||
+ | L 199 “used to maximise both the performance and the similarities with the trigger | ||
+ | stand-alone strategy” : this sentence is really obscure to the non-initiated | ||
+ | |||
+ | L207 “this spread can be quite restricted”: rephrase | ||
+ | L215 “along the phi direction relative to the initial direction of the electron” | ||
+ | what does it mean ? Radiation is emitted along the phi direction, period. | ||
+ | |||
+ | L217 “two super clustering algorithms” : supercluster is not defined | ||
+ | |||
+ | L220 -249 : these paragraphs are full of jargon (“dominoes”, “seed”), undefined | ||
+ | symbols (N_steps, etc), unreported values (value of ET^min_seed e.g.) | ||
+ | |||
+ | L266 “makes this a non optimal” -> a sub-optimal | ||
+ | L267 “there is a too large of a change in curvature due” -> when the change in | ||
+ | curvature is large because of bremsstrahlung | ||
+ | |||
+ | L281 “general tracks” : please check if they were ever defined | ||
+ | L290 “a subset of the seeds leads eventually to tracks “ ?? | ||
+ | L339 “the track stops collecting hits” : it’s hard to believe that tracks can | ||
+ | “collect hits” | ||
+ | L357 “a dedicated Bethe-Heitler function” : what is a dedicated Bethe-Heitler | ||
+ | |||
+ | L399 “emit high fractions of their energies” -> rephrase | ||
+ | |||
+ | L403 “difference in the material” -> imperfect modelling of the material budget in | ||
+ | simulation | ||
+ | L404 “access” -> assess | ||
+ | L407 define ”service region" | ||
+ | |||
+ | L423 “ECAL-driven seeded” : convoluted expression. BTW , we think “seeding” was | ||
+ | never explained | ||
+ | L433 “it is therefore not very restrictive in the direction along which … “ : puzzling | ||
+ | |||
+ | L449 “transition region” -> boundary between EB and EE | ||
+ | |||
+ | L463-464: try to explain better | ||
+ | L483 : “felt needed for the alignment procedure” : it’s not a matter of feelings, | ||
+ | please rephrase | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | L536 “ observables sensitive” -> suited to identify | ||
+ | |||
+ | L556 “ the end of the encaps” -> the highest eta endcap regions | ||
+ | |||
+ | L581 “laser monitoring system” -> add Ref | ||
+ | |||
+ | L611 it’s not the number that is reconstructed, but the vertices, flip the terms | ||
+ | (“number of reconstructed interaction vertices”) | ||
+ | L622 “CB with different parameters .. below and above the peak position” : explain | ||
+ | better, the peak position is a parameter itself | ||
+ | |||
+ | L654 “can cause the corrections” calls for the introduction of the corrections .. | ||
+ | |||
+ | L659-660 : “The SC energy is corrected by changing …” : put in this way it is quite | ||
+ | puzzling | ||
+ | |||
+ | L675 “The resolution of a SC energy is also affected by the sources of discrepancy” | ||
+ | ??? | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | L681-682 “smeared energy simulation” , define (we believe this is not the right | ||
+ | expression) | ||
+ | L684 “inflated” -> increased | ||
+ | |||
+ | L687 “after all the steps are taken” -> after the refinements explained in the | ||
+ | previous sections | ||
+ | |||
+ | L716 “must be corrected further on top of ..” please rephrase | ||
+ | |||
+ | L726 “the breadth of performance in data” | ||
+ | |||
+ | L744 “the resolutions are smeared in simulation” : resolutions are not smeared | ||
+ | |||
+ | L756-757 “used ..used” . | ||
+ | |||
+ | L759-763: unclear | ||
+ | |||
+ | L772 “through of a method” | ||
+ | |||
+ | L786 : “electrons produced within ..” -> originating form the decay of the b and c | ||
+ | quarks | ||
+ | |||
+ | L807 “reconstructed electrons that match generated electrons …” rephrase | ||
+ | |||
+ | L809 “enough purity” rephrase | ||
+ | |||
+ | L831 etc: explain why sigma_ietaieta is effective in discriminating signal from | ||
+ | background electrons | ||
+ | L834-835 “obtained by counting crystals” rephrase | ||
+ | |||
+ | L852 “shape information is expanded “ ? | ||
+ | |||
+ | L891: “significant energy flow near their trajectories” perhaps “significant | ||
+ | activity” ? | ||
+ | |||
+ | L897 : Introduce the paragraph by saying “Two techniques are employed …” | ||
+ | |||
+ | L908-909 : “the calibration that corresponds … used to define their contribution” | ||
+ | really obscure | ||
+ | L915-918 : obscure as well | ||
+ | |||
+ | Formula: please ensure you write a sound mathematical formula | ||
+ | |||
+ | L928: “among the most sensitive observables” -> among the observables more sensitive… | ||
+ | L932 A_eff not defined | ||
+ | |||
+ | L989-990 : please check if d0 and dz are defined | ||
+ | |||
+ | L994 “90,80,70%” we lost track of what the three numbers may refer to | ||
+ | L1015, L1023 add Reference | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | L1072 “dependence.. on the number of bins used “ ? | ||
+ | |||
+ | L1087 : "to select both the events and the probe “ ? | ||
+ | |||
+ | Fig25/25 perhaps can be merged ? | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | Section 7 “Summary and conclusions" | ||
+ | |||
+ | In this section it is particularly important to avoid CMS jargon | ||
+ | |||
+ | L1155/56 “with a single-cluster supercluster” , “multi-cluster supercluster” , | ||
+ | perhaps we could refer to high-brem and low-brem electrons ? | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | References | ||
+ | |||
+ | References should be uniformly presented. E.g , Ref 25 has “Vol”, “No” while others | ||
+ | have not (remove Vol, No, ). Some references have start and end page, others only | ||
+ | start page (remove end pages from refs 25,31,36). | ||