-- AmnonHarel - 14-Oct-2010

Unless stated differently, line numbers refer to "v4" of the paper draft.

Saving space

59-61 I believe you can drop these details (of how we measure the trigger effiicencies) - as said by Brajesh, not obvious to the reader, but also not necessary for the understanding of the paper. Their (implicitly) suggested text is:

We use data from three of these triggers, with thresholds
57 of 15, 30, and 50 GeV, for mjj greater than 156, 244, and 354 GeV, respectively, where their efficiency is greater than 99.5% (inner events have larger efficiencies)

84-85 - change text to: the default choice of (mR, mF) = (pT, pT) to the following six combinations (pT/2, pT/2), (2pT, 2pT), (pT, pT/2), (pT, 2pT), (pT/2, pT), and (2pT, pT).

85-86 you could shorten as The PDF uncertainties, (replace "are" by comma) estimated USING (drop repeated evaluations of the NLO-predicted R h for the PDFs in) the CTEQ-6.6, MSTW2008 [27], and NNPDF2.0 [28] sets, (comma)  and are found...

More global changes

Define "CNLO" as the corrected NLO, and use that throughout.

Uses for more space

Specify the turn offs for selected points (3 & 4TeV were suggested)

Edit | Attach | Watch | Print version | History: r4 < r3 < r2 < r1 | Backlinks | Raw View | Raw edit | More topic actions...
Topic revision: r3 - 2010-10-15 - AmnonHarel
    • Cern Search Icon Cern Search
    • TWiki Search Icon TWiki Search
    • Google Search Icon Google Search

    Main All webs login

This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by PerlCopyright & 2008-2019 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback