Hi all,

I write down a few comments while they are fresh.

Very well written paper. Congratulations! It's a bit longer than the limit and there may be suggestions to add more details during the circulation, so I also make suggestions on where to cut.

Analysis:
L.129-133: I dislike this approach as the outcome is unrelated to the systematic it's supposed to measure. The uncertainties (with correlations) should be taken into account when doing this. To which line in Table 1 does this correspond to?
L.183-186: I do not understand which magnet corrections you mean.

Text:
Abstract: Write \Km\Kp\pipm
L.14: predicted to be small ; asls = .... (I don't like as small as)
L.23: Turn the sentence : The result in this letter uses ... and supersedes .... But you could completely cut it (or at least the part relating to [7]) and add in lines 28-30 that [7] is superseded
L.36: "is reduced to asls/2" is very unclear. Reduced by whom? I suggest to put asls/2 in Eq. 2 and write "compared to ... Eq. 1, A_raw does not suffer from..."
L.47: you have not defined associated and do not need it. Just say IP is the closest distance to any PV.
L.52: remove "in the muon system" (where else?)
L.59 and onwards: I would prefer calling these regions \phi\pip and \Kstarz\Km to make clear what they are. Or just phi and K*0 regions.
L.64: "to which a muon" gives the impression the muon is part of the Ds. Not sure how to fix that.
L.68 and 140: "the" calibration samples are undefined. You should say they are described later.
Fig.1: Write \Dsm->\Km\Kp\pim to be consistent with the text and fix the axis labels accordingly. The plot is beautiful, but can be suppressed if space is needed. It does not add any physics relevant to the measurement.
L.100: of b hadrons
L.157: I would not use the word isoscalar here.
L.160: Remove "Since ... [7]" No need to justify yourself.
Table 1: Write each line as 0.11\pm0.09\pm0.02 and thus you can just have a single "value" label, without the two uncertainties. This will help getting it into a single column and makes it clearer what the three numbers are.
[2] is a review. Is that the best source for the numbers you quote?

Cheers,

Patrick

On 14/04/16 10:44, Patrick Koppenburg wrote:
Hi all,

A paper for us, with the slight annoyance that some of us are involved (that was a mistake, but decided not to fix it).

Cheers,

Patrick


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: First circulation of publication draft for PAPER-2016-013, Measurement of the $C\!P$ asymmetry in $B^0_s-\overline{B}^0_s$ mixing
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 10:33:23 +0200
From: Michael Schmelling <Michael.Schmelling@mpi-hd.mpg.de>
To: LHCb General mailing list <lhcb-general@cern.ch> 


Dear Colleagues,

A draft paper is available for your comments:

Title           : Measurement of the $C\!P$ asymmetry in $B^0_s-\overline{B}^0_s$ mixing

Journal         : PRL
Contact authors : Jacco_de_Vries, Mika_Vesterinen, Marina_Artuso
Reviewers       : Thomas_Ruf (chair), 
                  Olaf_Steinkamp
EB reviewer     : David_Ward
EB readers      : Vincent_Tisserand, Michael_Schmelling
Analysis note   : ANA-2016-004
Deadline        : 28-Apr-2016
e-group         : lhcb-paper-2016-013-reviewers
Link            : https://cds.cern.ch/record/2146010
Authors         : LHCb 
Twiki           : https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/LHCbPhysics/Asls3fbFullDsKKPi

The following institutes are requested to make institutional comments:
NIKHEF_VU__Netherlands
Ferrara__Italy
Padova__Italy
Maryland__USA
Santiago_de_Compostela__Spain
Oxford__United_Kingdom


Please send any comments via the CDS system. It is the responsibility
of the contact authors to provide replies to all comments
made. Subsequent modifications to the draft will be 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, when final decisions will be
made. As the last step, the collaboration will be given a final opportunity
to comment during a “silent approval” period.

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_board/default.html

Best regards,
Michael

--
Michael Schmelling, MPI for Nuclear Physics
Phone:+49-6221-516-511 Fax:+49-6221-516-603 









-- 
========================================================================
 Patrick Koppenburg                                   Nikhef, Amsterdam
 http://www.koppenburg.org/address.html