Differenze

Queste sono le differenze tra la revisione selezionata e la versione attuale della pagina.

--- cms:exo-12-002 [31/08/2012 10:33]
casasso
+++ cms:exo-12-002 [02/09/2012 08:09] (versione attuale)
migliore
@@ Linea 1: / Linea 1: @@
 http://cms.cern.ch/cds/EXO-12-002
+Roberta
+--------
+Commenti generali: pur essendo abbastanza in accordo con la linea di quelli gia' espressi da voi, io eviterei di proporgli la riscrittura del paper secondo una nuova logica di presentazione. Chiederei loro di aggiungere delle frasi "cappello" che aiutino il lettore a seguire le fasi descrittive dell'articolo.
+Abstract:
+Please rewrite first sentence -> too long.Make shorter one(s)
+Last sentence: remove "The stringents "
+l9: remove "for current integrated luminosity"
+l12: Results obtained -> The obtained results
+l28: pair pair...remove one
+l35: to two taus and two b jets, using pp collisions * at sqrt(7) = 7 TeV, is presented.  The data have been collected by the CMS experiment and correspond to an integrated luminosity of 4.8 fb-1.
+l38: These requirements result in two possible final states...
+l47:  in the l tau_h b bbar final state, assuming beta = 1,...
+l48:production in the  l tau_h b bbar final state
+l55 : *a* calorimetry system
+l58: has extensive forward ...-> ?? does not mean much... either you specify better or remove the adjective
+l61: were collected ...-> are collected using triggers requiring (remove "a set of")
+l88: the INVARIANT mass of ..
+l91: the the ...
+l90-92: are you missing a verb?? not understandable
+l94: from SM processes ARE ...
+l95-96: There ARE also small CONTRIBUTIONS from ...
+l100: 200 to 800 GeV.. MADGRAPH generator...  hadronization and showering, has been used to model...
+l114-120: are you talking about single top bkg? Remove first sentence. Add *single* in line 115
+Sulle figure: stessi commenti identici di Nicolo!
 Stefano C.
 --------------
 Type B comments
+- You quote the CDF limit on the stop mass (lines 48-51) which, btw, are LOWER not UPPER limits, (see Type A comments) as the best limits before this search, excluding M_t1 < 153 GeV. Your results seem to extend the limits at 453 GeV (240 GeV) for lambda_333 = 1 (any lambda_333), as you state in lines 178-180. Since your search is done in the 200-800 GeV it's not clear to me how you are able to exclude also the 153-200 GeV range. Could you explain me what I am missing?
 - Too few figures and maybe even too small (especially the one with the limits!). I suggest to add somewhere (e.g. line 8,26) some Feynman diagrams, a few control distributions somewhere.
@@ Linea 40: / Linea 88: @@
 - L 46: leptoquarks->leptoquark
+- L 50: upper -> lower
 - L 60: CMS detector-> the CMS detector
@@ Linea 45: / Linea 95: @@
 - L 70-71: information->informations, is->are, final-state->stable
-- L 80: references should go after "algporithm"
+- L 80: references should go after "algorithm"
 - L 82-83: "corrected by correcting"??
@@ Linea 51: / Linea 101: @@
 - L 109-110: not well explained... Is the simulation corrected before computing the efficiencies or what?
-BTW:
+(BTW my draft here stops to count the lines for 13 lines...)
+- After eq.1: you define here the missing Et but you should have done it some lines before when you first introduced it
+- L 128: as are-> as
+- L 130: could be -> is
+- L 171: bquark -> b-quark