Hi Wouter,
I thank the referees for picking up of some comments. I'll have a closer look at Sheldon's answers to our general comments.
My first reaction to his answers is:
On 1) Let's check if those mentioned studies in the analysis note are considered enough
On 2) It can then be mentioned/clarified in the paper
On 3) If it was done I would like to see the results (analysis note?)
On 4) I'm still wondering if it is the same as what Sheldon says. Would like to discuss with you.
On 5) That's what the ref's are picking up, right?
On 6) Basically his answer is: BG is not always physics. I can actually live with the fact that it "just" describes the data.
And I will thank Sheldon for his excellent and concise explanations.
Groeten,
- Marcel
On 30 March 2012 16:00, Wouter Hulsbergen
<wouterh@nikhef.nl> wrote:
Hi Marcel,
Concerning the Ds asymmetry, Sheldon gave rather short answers, as
expected. However, the referees picked it up and we convinced them that
they will still report the MC efficiency in the analysis note, as a
function of true pion momentum. This will hopefully tell us if the
'deconvolution' procedure is sound and if the numbers on data make any
sense ... I am afraid that we cannot convince them to do the Ds part of
the analysis on MC as well.
Cheers,
Wouter
On 03/29/2012 11:13 PM, Marcel Merk wrote:
> And I did the same for the Ds+ - Ds- asymmetry paper...
> cheers,
> - Marcel
>
> On 29 March 2012 23:05, Tjeerd Ketel <
tjeerd@nikhef.nl
> https://mailman.nikhef.nl/mailman/listinfo/bfys-physics