[1] In the analysis note, mention the total number of events analyzed for each multiplicity class. Update the total integrated luminosity to 35 nb-1. Mention what are pre-scale value for each multiplicity class.

[2] Check with the experts on the effect of HLT efficiency not 100% at the edges of multiplicity classes.

[3] Demonstrate that v2-bkg obtained from lower mass region don't effect the final results. Also, change the sideband to 0.18 - 0.23GeV/c2, change the width to demonstrate that the results don't change.Just to be clear, this was only for the systematic error analysis. We did not ask for the "default" analysis to be changed.

[4] Show shower shape distribution (S4/S9 ratio) for pPb collisions and explain the rationale for choosing 0.83 and 0.91. Also, obtain the reference (S4/S9=0.87) for 120 < Mult < 260 class for an apples-to-apples comparison to obtain systematic uncertainty.This was for both S4/S9 and signal region (both slides 9 & 11).

[5] It was not clear to the committee what causes the v2 values to change when different values for s4/s9 ratio are chosen. So show theinvariant mass distributions for each of the S4/S9 values, at least for one pT bin.

[6] One pT/multiplicity bin, i.e. just one point on one of the S4/S9 systematics plots. I'd also like to see the Delta-phi plots compared with fits on them.

[7] I have a strong preference for seeing them compared on top of each other, not side-by-side. Apologies for adding to the work, but I'd also like to see one example where the signal region was changed, one point with a with big red-black gap on slide 10 or 34. In this case, the mass plots are presumably identical so it's just the Delta-phi that needs to be compared. Also, list the values for individual components (v2-bkg, v2- obs, signal fraction etc.) for one multiplicity bin and a pT bin for the committee to visualize things better. This would be the same bin (or bins including my signal region request) for which the figures mentioned above are shown.

[8] AN also shows the study based on 120-260 reference bin, new systematic errors and results with new systematic errors. We also did the eta dependent study. Update the PAS and AN with the comments already received on the list and during today's meeting before the next ARC meeting so that the committee can read the documents beforehand.

[9] Send an email next week on Wednesday/Thursday (Apr 9/10) if a fair amount of progress has been made for the ARC members to meet on Apr 15. Then send the doodle poll.

[10] Show that the data point for 6-8 GeV/c pT bin has large statistical uncertainty for you to drop this data point.

-- RaviJanjam - 16 Apr 2014 -- MonikaSharma - 22 Apr 2014