2016-11-22-straight-tracks-paper » History » Revision 4

« Previous | Revision 4/9 (diff) | Next »
Rogers, Chris, 23 November 2016 13:52





John Cobb
Paul Soler
Mariyan Bogomilov
Chris Rogers
Alan Young
Ryan Bayes

Page 1

First three comments may be more appropriate for the paper rather than the MICE note
  • Should defend choice of Xenon
  • Should define symbols in emittance formula
  • Should define equilibrium emittance
  1. "Thus, despite the limited angular range it is extremely attractive as a direct measure of the
    scattering of muons" Need to add some more quantitative discussion of angular acceptance.

Page 2

  1. Table 1: Row for Al numbers are suspect - correct
  2. Table 1: General comment that some description of the material budget is required; how much material and where?
  3. Table 1: In similar vein, some description of absorber is necessary
  4. Scattering angle definitions eqn (3) and (4) are not correct - see supplementary note from JHC Projected-angles.pdf
  5. Correction theta = \sqrt(<theta_scatt>) should be theta = \sqrt(<theta^2>)
  6. There was some discussion over the use of a Gaussian fit, as mentioned in final sentence of 1.1. Comment that the description would be better in the "analysis" section where the relevant measurements and plots are listed.
  7. 0.0038 should be 0.038
  8. Comment that section 1.2 needs a lot of work; it was not reviewed in detail.

Page 3

Updated by Rogers, Chris over 7 years ago · 4 revisions