Hi Tjeerd,

A few comments on this short paper:

Line 30: Bracket notation for mass splitting is a bit confusing. As it is it looks a bit liek a multipliciation.
Line 31: two times "that"
Line 91: What is the systematic on the lifetime related to multiple candidates? In an extreme case one coiuld keep the longest or shortest candidate only and see by how much the lifetimes are affected.
Line 153-Line 156: Since the TIS / TOS samples are large I wonder by how much the observables (lifetimes/masses) are affected if splitting the sample in TIS and TOS parts. (Probably more conservative than the sys error described on lines 181 - 183).

Cheers,
- Marcel


On 18 August 2014 12:51, Tjeerd Ketel <tjeerd@nikhef.nl> wrote:
Dear all,

Attached are some of my personal comments.

Best regards,
 Tjeerd


Citeren Tjeerd Ketel <tjeerd@nikhef.nl>:


Dear all,

We have a short paper to be commented by Nikhef before Tuesday 19/8.
Please, give your comments by email. I will collect them
latest on Tuesday and upload our comments, after a short check with
you, that evening to CDS.

Best regards,
   Tjeerd

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2014 21:54:57 +0000
From: Rolf Oldeman <rudolf.oldeman@cern.ch>
To: "lhcb-general (LHCb General mailing list)" <lhcb-general@cern.ch>
Subject: First circulation of publication draft for PAPER-2014-048,
    Precision measurement of the mass and lifetime of the $\Xi_b^-$ baryon

Dear Colleagues,

A paper is available for your comments:

Title           : 
Precision measurement of the mass and lifetime of the $\Xi_b^-$ baryon

Journal         : PRL
Contact authors : Steve Blusk
Reviewers       : Giacomo Graziani (chair), 
                  Matt Needham
EB reviewer     : Patrick Koppenburg
EB readers      : Diego Tonelli, Ronan McNulty
Analysis note   : ANA-2013-065
Deadline        : 19-Aug-2014
e-group         : lhcb-paper-2014-048-reviewers
Link            : https://cds.cern.ch/record/1747836
Authors         : LHCb 
Twiki          
: https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/LHCbPhysics/XibMinus2XicZeroHDecays

The following institutes are requested to make institutional comments:
Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, Cracow, Poland
Birmingham, United Kingdom
NIKHEF VU, Netherlands
Ferrara, Italy
KINR, Kyiv, Ukraine
Roma Tor Vergata, Roma, Italy

Note that this list differs from what was announced at the time of the approval:
the last-minute change was done to free institutes that had just gotten the 
113 page luminosity paper from any other assignments. 

Although the main body of the draft has been fully reviewed and signed off by
the reviewers,
a couple of 'technical' items are still missing due the very short available
time between approval
and the proponent leaving for a trip.

The present draft misses: paper number / author list / PRL justification / word
count

Please send any comments via the CDS system. It is the responsibility
of the contact authors to provide replies on all comments
made. Subsequent modification to the publication are made in
consultation with the reviewers and during the EB reading. Following
this, there will be a final meeting of the editorial board with
contact authors and reviewers present where final decisions are
made. As the last step a short presentation is given to the
collaboration and the paper is sent for publication.

You can find all paper and conference report drafts open for comments
via the EB web-page, by clicking on Current Drafts.

http://lhcb.web.cern.ch/lhcb/lhcb_page/collaboration/organization/editorial_boa
rd/default.html

Regards,
      Rolf Oldeman





_______________________________________________
Bfys-physics mailing list
Bfys-physics@nikhef.nl
https://mailman.nikhef.nl/mailman/listinfo/bfys-physics