Line: 1 to 1 | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||
Line: 80 to 80 | ||||||||
I agree with Adrian on the JHEP references, I don't know however if the paper is following some established ATLAS convention. | ||||||||
Added: | ||||||||
> > | Rick St. Denis' Comments
o p1 line 6: I thought LPV is a general feature of GUT models, an even more convincing extension. Not sure how to get a ref. o p1 line 33: Why is the top squark taken to be the lightest up type squark? Is it because limits are set lowest? I assume b squark is more massvive. So I agree with James on this. o line 35, page 3: Standard ATLAS tools needs a ref or description. o Fig 2: dont understand the "total background". Signal hard to see at all on dphi and nJet plot. The preselection tells one that the top is understood but the final selection has no top visible. The issue is to ensure tha tthe kinmatic distribution of diboson is correct. Also, the instrumental suffers low statistics and the tails could be an issue. It does not seem these plots are of any use in the final analysis. o Fig 3: seems that in the end this is just a counting experiment and it is hard to see where the kinematic cuts help. | |||||||
-- DeepakKar - 2012-02-14 -- AdrianBuzatu - 2012-02-15 |