Dear all,
No bfys meeting tomorrow. We did not find a volunteer available before the dead line.
I suggest that everybody gives comments to this paper as Cc and that next week somebody combines them for a Nikhef group response uploaded to CDS. An answer may be expected then and should be checked.
As many of us, I will be away from next week and cannot do it.
Best regards, Tjeerd
On Mon, 6 Jul 2015, Tjeerd Ketel wrote:
Dear all,
We have a paper to comment. It would be nice to discuss it this Friday 10 July. Volunteer? Let me know.
Best regards, Tjeerd
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: First circulation of publication draft for PAPER-2015-036, Search for hidden-sector bosons in $B^0\to K^*\chi(\to\mu^+\mu^-)$ decays Date: Maandag 6 Juli 2015 08:49 CEST From: George Lafferty george.lafferty@manchester.ac.uk To: LHCb General mailing list lhcb-general@cern.ch
Dear Colleagues,
A draft paper is available for your comments:
Title : Search for hidden-sector bosons in $B^0\to K^*\chi(\to\mu^+\mu^-)$ decays
Journal : PRL Contact authors : Sam_Hall, Mike_Williams, Mitesh_Patel Reviewers : Katharina_Mueller (chair), Alberto_Lusiani EB reviewer : Diego_Tonelli EB readers : Claudia_Patrignani, Mat_Charles Analysis note : ANA-2015-008 Deadline : 17-Jul-2015 e-group : lhcb-paper-2015-036-reviewers Link : http://cds.cern.ch/record/2031121 Authors : LHCb Twiki : https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/LHCbPhysics/BtoKstarX
The following institutes are requested to make institutional comments: Bucharest-Magurele__Romania Milano-Bicocca__Italy Liverpool__United_Kingdom Bologna__Italy EPFL__Lausanne__Switzerland NIKHEF__Netherlands
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_...
Best regards, George
Dear all,
I can collect the comments as I will paste something into CDS anyway.
Cheers,
Patrick
On 09/07/15 18:27, Tjeerd Ketel wrote:
Dear all,
No bfys meeting tomorrow. We did not find a volunteer available before the dead line.
I suggest that everybody gives comments to this paper as Cc and that next week somebody combines them for a Nikhef group response uploaded to CDS. An answer may be expected then and should be checked.
As many of us, I will be away from next week and cannot do it.
Best regards, Tjeerd
On Mon, 6 Jul 2015, Tjeerd Ketel wrote:
Dear all,
We have a paper to comment. It would be nice to discuss it this Friday 10 July. Volunteer? Let me know.
Best regards, Tjeerd
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: First circulation of publication draft for PAPER-2015-036, Search for hidden-sector bosons in $B^0\to K^*\chi(\to\mu^+\mu^-)$ decays Date: Maandag 6 Juli 2015 08:49 CEST From: George Lafferty george.lafferty@manchester.ac.uk To: LHCb General mailing list lhcb-general@cern.ch
Dear Colleagues,
A draft paper is available for your comments:
Title : Search for hidden-sector bosons in $B^0\to K^*\chi(\to\mu^+\mu^-)$ decays
Journal : PRL Contact authors : Sam_Hall, Mike_Williams, Mitesh_Patel Reviewers : Katharina_Mueller (chair), Alberto_Lusiani EB reviewer : Diego_Tonelli EB readers : Claudia_Patrignani, Mat_Charles Analysis note : ANA-2015-008 Deadline : 17-Jul-2015 e-group : lhcb-paper-2015-036-reviewers Link : http://cds.cern.ch/record/2031121 Authors : LHCb Twiki : https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/LHCbPhysics/BtoKstarX
The following institutes are requested to make institutional comments: Bucharest-Magurele__Romania Milano-Bicocca__Italy Liverpool__United_Kingdom Bologna__Italy EPFL__Lausanne__Switzerland NIKHEF__Netherlands
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_...
Best regards, George
Bfys-physics mailing list Bfys-physics@nikhef.nl https://mailman.nikhef.nl/mailman/listinfo/bfys-physics
Dear all,
I also have two minor comments:
l52: could "Only tracks with hits in..." be changed to something like "Only tracks reconstructed in..."? (the Velo tracking, especially in Hlt1, is not fully efficient for short and non-pointing tracks) l82-84: with the B-mass, pointing and isolation cuts described in the next paragraph, I would expect the contribution from combining decay products from different b's to be very small... is it really non-negligible, or are the dimuon mass veto's in the displaced region applied mostly to remove
3*sigma_tau Bd -> J/psi Kstar etc.?
On the efficiency for displaced decays systematic (l.145-152) I am a bit unsure what to ask... I do not want to argue that a 5% systematic is too small, but I think we could do better: the number they give (for the main systematic that is not an external input) comes from (mostly MC) statistics in the control mode, and looking at the KS0 in J/psi KS0 does not probe the Hlt1 effect because these decays are mostly triggered by the J/psi. Does anyone know how to turn this into a nice question/comment (if we should bring it up at all)?
Thanks,
Pieter
Op donderdag 9 juli 2015 18:27:09 schreef Tjeerd Ketel:
Dear all,
No bfys meeting tomorrow. We did not find a volunteer available before the dead line.
I suggest that everybody gives comments to this paper as Cc and that next week somebody combines them for a Nikhef group response uploaded to CDS. An answer may be expected then and should be checked.
As many of us, I will be away from next week and cannot do it.
Best regards, Tjeerd
On Mon, 6 Jul 2015, Tjeerd Ketel wrote:
Dear all,
We have a paper to comment. It would be nice to discuss it this Friday 10 July. Volunteer? Let me know.
Best regards,
Tjeerd-------- Original Message -------- Subject: First circulation of publication draft for PAPER-2015-036, Search for hidden-sector bosons in $B^0\to K^*\chi(\to\mu^+\mu^-)$ decays
Date:
Maandag 6 Juli 2015 08:49 CEST From: George Lafferty george.lafferty@manchester.ac.uk To: LHCb General mailing list lhcb-general@cern.ch
Dear Colleagues,
A draft paper is available for your comments:
Title : Search for hidden-sector bosons in $B^0\to K^*\chi(\to\mu^+\mu^-)$ decays
Journal : PRL Contact authors : Sam_Hall, Mike_Williams, Mitesh_Patel Reviewers : Katharina_Mueller (chair),
Alberto_LusianiEB reviewer : Diego_Tonelli EB readers : Claudia_Patrignani, Mat_Charles Analysis note : ANA-2015-008 Deadline : 17-Jul-2015 e-group : lhcb-paper-2015-036-reviewers Link : http://cds.cern.ch/record/2031121 Authors : LHCb Twiki : https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/LHCbPhysics/BtoKstarX
The following institutes are requested to make institutional comments: Bucharest-Magurele__Romania Milano-Bicocca__Italy Liverpool__United_Kingdom Bologna__Italy EPFL__Lausanne__Switzerland NIKHEF__Netherlands
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/editoria
l_board/default.html
Best regards, George
Dear all,
Here's what I put in CDS based on Tjeerd's, Pieter's and my comments:
Dear Mike, Mitesh, Sam,
Here are the comments from Nationaal instituut voor subatomaire fysica, aka Nikhef,
Physics/understanding: General: The choice of K*mumu as control mode needs a better explanation and justification, in particular for the prompt mode. It's not clear why you did not use J/psiK* which avoids any correlations.
Introduction: you explain in how these particles are produced but not that they decay to mumu. A few words on that would be useful.
L.82-84: with the B-mass, pointing and isolation cuts described in the next paragraph, we would expect the contribution from combining decay products from different B's to be very small... is it really non-negligible, or are the dimuon mass vetoes in the displaced region applied mostly to remove > 3*sigma_tau Bd -> J/psi Kstar etc.?
L.145-152: Is this the optimal way of assessing this systematic uncertainty. It's the main systematic that is not an external input and comes from mostly MC statistics in the control mode (do we understand right?). Looking at the KS0 in J/psi KS0 does not probe the Hlt1 effect because these decays are mostly triggered by the J/psi.
Text: L.21: is "invoke" the right word here?
L.51: the -> any pp-interaction
l.52: could "Only tracks with hits in..." be changed to something like "Only tracks reconstructed in..."? (the Velo tracking, especially in Hlt1, is not fully efficient for short and non-pointing tracks)
L.104: what significance do you optimise for?
Fig.2: Say in the caption this is the normalisation mode.
L.117: "prompt candidates" may be confusing here. Say you mean the chi has vanishing lifetime.
L.126: There's "first" here. Where's second?
L.136: 11 (6.2)
L.138: explain the J/psi peaks Fig 3 here.
L.162: affects -> determines (?)
L.168: Limits of B(B->K*chi) x B(chi->mumu)
Table 1: If you need to save some space you can put these numbers in the text.
Fig.4 is unreadable in black and white. What are the unlabelled very light grey points below the black ones? Ah I now see a tiny 1. Put t=1 ps explicitly. Please make a colour version for additional material (and already for EPS).
L.175-177: Either the scale on the right is correct, or don't put it. You could put a plot with BF limits in the paper and one with the ratio in additional material. Or the other way round.
Fig.5 is referred twice in L.183 and L.188. I suggest you make that 2 figures are this is how they will likely appear in PRL.
L.200: For the EB: In the past we have refrained from thanking people we cite. I don't mind but we should be consistent.
[15] is published
[39] is not in preparation. Please update LHCb-PAPER.bib
L.324 is "evoke" the right word here? See comment about line 21.
Fig.7: "over" is not correct here but we fail to rewrite the sentence.
Cheers,
Patrick
On 07/13/2015 10:26 AM, Pieter David wrote:
Dear all,
I also have two minor comments:
l52: could "Only tracks with hits in..." be changed to something like "Only tracks reconstructed in..."? (the Velo tracking, especially in Hlt1, is not fully efficient for short and non-pointing tracks) l82-84: with the B-mass, pointing and isolation cuts described in the next paragraph, I would expect the contribution from combining decay products from different b's to be very small... is it really non-negligible, or are the dimuon mass veto's in the displaced region applied mostly to remove
3*sigma_tau Bd -> J/psi Kstar etc.?
On the efficiency for displaced decays systematic (l.145-152) I am a bit unsure what to ask... I do not want to argue that a 5% systematic is too small, but I think we could do better: the number they give (for the main systematic that is not an external input) comes from (mostly MC) statistics in the control mode, and looking at the KS0 in J/psi KS0 does not probe the Hlt1 effect because these decays are mostly triggered by the J/psi. Does anyone know how to turn this into a nice question/comment (if we should bring it up at all)?
Thanks,
Pieter
Op donderdag 9 juli 2015 18:27:09 schreef Tjeerd Ketel:
Dear all,
No bfys meeting tomorrow. We did not find a volunteer available before the dead line.
I suggest that everybody gives comments to this paper as Cc and that next week somebody combines them for a Nikhef group response uploaded to CDS. An answer may be expected then and should be checked.
As many of us, I will be away from next week and cannot do it.
Best regards, Tjeerd
On Mon, 6 Jul 2015, Tjeerd Ketel wrote:
Dear all,
We have a paper to comment. It would be nice to discuss it this Friday 10 July. Volunteer? Let me know.
Best regards,
Tjeerd-------- Original Message -------- Subject: First circulation of publication draft for PAPER-2015-036, Search for hidden-sector bosons in $B^0\to K^*\chi(\to\mu^+\mu^-)$ decays
Date:
Maandag 6 Juli 2015 08:49 CEST From: George Lafferty george.lafferty@manchester.ac.uk To: LHCb General mailing list lhcb-general@cern.ch
Dear Colleagues,
A draft paper is available for your comments:
Title : Search for hidden-sector bosons in $B^0\to K^*\chi(\to\mu^+\mu^-)$ decays
Journal : PRL Contact authors : Sam_Hall, Mike_Williams, Mitesh_Patel Reviewers : Katharina_Mueller (chair),
Alberto_LusianiEB reviewer : Diego_Tonelli EB readers : Claudia_Patrignani, Mat_Charles Analysis note : ANA-2015-008 Deadline : 17-Jul-2015 e-group : lhcb-paper-2015-036-reviewers Link : http://cds.cern.ch/record/2031121 Authors : LHCb Twiki : https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/LHCbPhysics/BtoKstarX
The following institutes are requested to make institutional comments: Bucharest-Magurele__Romania Milano-Bicocca__Italy Liverpool__United_Kingdom Bologna__Italy EPFL__Lausanne__Switzerland NIKHEF__Netherlands
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/editoria
l_board/default.html
Best regards, George
Bfys-physics mailing list Bfys-physics@nikhef.nl https://mailman.nikhef.nl/mailman/listinfo/bfys-physics
Dear all,
Here are the replies : https://cds.cern.ch/record/2035554?ln=en
Looks OK to me.
Cheers,
Patrick
On 17/07/15 16:30, Patrick Koppenburg wrote:
Dear all,
Here's what I put in CDS based on Tjeerd's, Pieter's and my comments:
Dear Mike, Mitesh, Sam,
Here are the comments from Nationaal instituut voor subatomaire fysica, aka Nikhef,
Physics/understanding: General: The choice of K*mumu as control mode needs a better explanation and justification, in particular for the prompt mode. It's not clear why you did not use J/psiK* which avoids any correlations.
Introduction: you explain in how these particles are produced but not that they decay to mumu. A few words on that would be useful.
L.82-84: with the B-mass, pointing and isolation cuts described in the next paragraph, we would expect the contribution from combining decay products from different B's to be very small... is it really non-negligible, or are the dimuon mass vetoes in the displaced region applied mostly to remove > 3*sigma_tau Bd -> J/psi Kstar etc.?
L.145-152: Is this the optimal way of assessing this systematic uncertainty. It's the main systematic that is not an external input and comes from mostly MC statistics in the control mode (do we understand right?). Looking at the KS0 in J/psi KS0 does not probe the Hlt1 effect because these decays are mostly triggered by the J/psi.
Text: L.21: is "invoke" the right word here?
L.51: the -> any pp-interaction
l.52: could "Only tracks with hits in..." be changed to something like "Only tracks reconstructed in..."? (the Velo tracking, especially in Hlt1, is not fully efficient for short and non-pointing tracks)
L.104: what significance do you optimise for?
Fig.2: Say in the caption this is the normalisation mode.
L.117: "prompt candidates" may be confusing here. Say you mean the chi has vanishing lifetime.
L.126: There's "first" here. Where's second?
L.136: 11 (6.2)
L.138: explain the J/psi peaks Fig 3 here.
L.162: affects -> determines (?)
L.168: Limits of B(B->K*chi) x B(chi->mumu)
Table 1: If you need to save some space you can put these numbers in the text.
Fig.4 is unreadable in black and white. What are the unlabelled very light grey points below the black ones? Ah I now see a tiny 1. Put t=1 ps explicitly. Please make a colour version for additional material (and already for EPS).
L.175-177: Either the scale on the right is correct, or don't put it. You could put a plot with BF limits in the paper and one with the ratio in additional material. Or the other way round.
Fig.5 is referred twice in L.183 and L.188. I suggest you make that 2 figures are this is how they will likely appear in PRL.
L.200: For the EB: In the past we have refrained from thanking people we cite. I don't mind but we should be consistent.
[15] is published
[39] is not in preparation. Please update LHCb-PAPER.bib
L.324 is "evoke" the right word here? See comment about line 21.
Fig.7: "over" is not correct here but we fail to rewrite the sentence.
Cheers,
Patrick
On 07/13/2015 10:26 AM, Pieter David wrote:
Dear all,
I also have two minor comments:
l52: could "Only tracks with hits in..." be changed to something like "Only tracks reconstructed in..."? (the Velo tracking, especially in Hlt1, is not fully efficient for short and non-pointing tracks) l82-84: with the B-mass, pointing and isolation cuts described in the next paragraph, I would expect the contribution from combining decay products from different b's to be very small... is it really non-negligible, or are the dimuon mass veto's in the displaced region applied mostly to remove
3*sigma_tau Bd -> J/psi Kstar etc.?
On the efficiency for displaced decays systematic (l.145-152) I am a bit unsure what to ask... I do not want to argue that a 5% systematic is too small, but I think we could do better: the number they give (for the main systematic that is not an external input) comes from (mostly MC) statistics in the control mode, and looking at the KS0 in J/psi KS0 does not probe the Hlt1 effect because these decays are mostly triggered by the J/psi. Does anyone know how to turn this into a nice question/comment (if we should bring it up at all)?
Thanks,
Pieter
Op donderdag 9 juli 2015 18:27:09 schreef Tjeerd Ketel:
Dear all,
No bfys meeting tomorrow. We did not find a volunteer available before the dead line.
I suggest that everybody gives comments to this paper as Cc and that next week somebody combines them for a Nikhef group response uploaded to CDS. An answer may be expected then and should be checked.
As many of us, I will be away from next week and cannot do it.
Best regards, Tjeerd
On Mon, 6 Jul 2015, Tjeerd Ketel wrote:
Dear all,
We have a paper to comment. It would be nice to discuss it this Friday 10 July. Volunteer? Let me know.
Best regards,
Tjeerd-------- Original Message -------- Subject: First circulation of publication draft for PAPER-2015-036, Search for hidden-sector bosons in $B^0\to K^*\chi(\to\mu^+\mu^-)$ decays
Date:
Maandag 6 Juli 2015 08:49 CEST From: George Lafferty george.lafferty@manchester.ac.uk To: LHCb General mailing list lhcb-general@cern.ch
Dear Colleagues,
A draft paper is available for your comments:
Title : Search for hidden-sector bosons in $B^0\to K^*\chi(\to\mu^+\mu^-)$ decays
Journal : PRL Contact authors : Sam_Hall, Mike_Williams, Mitesh_Patel Reviewers : Katharina_Mueller (chair),
Alberto_LusianiEB reviewer : Diego_Tonelli EB readers : Claudia_Patrignani, Mat_Charles Analysis note : ANA-2015-008 Deadline : 17-Jul-2015 e-group : lhcb-paper-2015-036-reviewers Link : http://cds.cern.ch/record/2031121 Authors : LHCb Twiki : https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/LHCbPhysics/BtoKstarX
The following institutes are requested to make institutional comments: Bucharest-Magurele__Romania Milano-Bicocca__Italy Liverpool__United_Kingdom Bologna__Italy EPFL__Lausanne__Switzerland NIKHEF__Netherlands
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/editoria
l_board/default.html
Best regards, George
Bfys-physics mailing list Bfys-physics@nikhef.nl https://mailman.nikhef.nl/mailman/listinfo/bfys-physics
-
Patrick Koppenburg -
Pieter David -
Tjeerd Ketel