= Language = PAGE 1 Abstract Line 4: ”hadronic calorimeter” ! ”hadron calorimeter”. The authors are invited to look for all instances of ”hadronic calorimeter” and modify ac- cordingly. [This comment is not repeated for other occurrences.] >>> addressed Line 5: ”allows to produce collections” is not proper english. Replace either by ”allows the easy production of collections” or ”allows collections to be easily produced”. The authors are invited to look for all instances of the verb ”to allow” in the text, as it most often incorrectly used throughout. [This comment is not going to be repeated for the other sections.] >>> addressed when needed. It is however correct to say: "allows the user to store collections ..", see http://sentence.yourdictionary.com/allow Line 5: The word ”collections” appears out of context here, and carries no meaning to the casual reader. >>> changed to "physics objects" PAGE 2 == Introduction == Second paragraph: L3: ”parametrisation” has the wrong spelling. How about using ”param- eterization”, which is the proper word. The authors are invited to look for all instances of ”parametris...” in the text, as this comment is not going to be repeated for the other sections. >>> addressed Third paragraph: L1: A sentence must not start with an acronym (here ”DELPHES”). The authors are invited to look for all instances of DELPHES, and rephrase when at a start of a sentence. >>> DELPHES is neither an acronym nor an abbreviation; it is therefore fine to start a sentence with it. L1: No hyphen between ”data” and ”format”. Actually, ”data-format” can be dropped altogether without losing information. >>> addressed, "data-format" L4: ”final observables” of photons and leptons is jargon, and carries lit- tle meaning to the casual reader. The authors probably mean ”measured energy” ? >>> addressed L5: ”the relevant sub-detectors” is also very much unclear. How about simply ”the detector resolution” >>> addressed L6: ”High-level reconstructed quantities such as” carries little meaning to the casual reader. The sentence would read better without it. >>> addressed L7: Why are ”calorimeter deposits” qualified as ”simple” ? Suggest to drop it. Why is the ”particle-flow algorithm” qualified as ”so-called” ? Sug- gest to drop it. >>> changed, not relevant anymore. Fourth paragraph: L4: ”b” and all particle names ought to be written in roman style. (True for the whole paper.) No hyphen between ”tau” and ”tagging”. Fifth paragraph: L2: ”will be described/given” ! ”is described/given in Sections xxx” (two occurrences). The authors are invited to look for all instances of ”will”, and replace it by the present tense in most cases. == Section 2 == L3: I am not sure of ”symmetric along the beam axis”, especially the word ”along”. How about ”with a cylindrical symmetry around the beam axis” ? === Section 2.1 === L2: What is the meaning of ”The magnetic field is applied” ? Applied to what ? Maybe the authors want to say ”is assumed to be localized” ? PAGE 3 L2: The magnetic field is not ”solenoidal”, it is ”axial” (because it is pro- duced by a solenoid). Par 2: L1: What is the meaning of ”(good)” ? Maybe the authors want to say ”in general high” ? ”Seen” ! ”reconstructed” L2: ”which provide a direct measurement of their momentum”: I am not sure of what ”provide(s)” this measurement in this sentence. How about starting a new sentence indicated that the measured curvature to the recon- structed trajectory and the magnetic field intensity allow the momentum to be measured. L3: ”The angular resolution is assumed excellent” ! ”A perfect angular resolution is assumed” === Section 2.2 === Par 1: L3: ”strongly interacting particles” ! ”long-lived charged and neutral hadrons” Par 2: L5: ”calorimeter object” is an undefined concept here. How about ”calorime- ter energy deposit (later called hit)” ? ”center” should be ”centre” (unless the au- thors decide to write in american english). PAGE 4 === Section 2.3 === Par 1: L3: ”several collaborations” : Ref. [3] points to the CMS Collaboration. What are the other(s) ? L3: ”intrinsically” has little meaning here. Suggest to drop. Par 2: L1: ”higher” should be ”better” PAGE 5 === Section 2.3 === Last paragraph, L1 : ”consists in” should be ”consists of” PAGE 6 ==== Section 3.1.3 ==== L1: Why is ”isolated” in italics ? ”surrounding” should be ”surroundings”, or better, ”vicinity” L2: Starting a sentence with ”Requiring” (or any verb in ”ing”) is bad English, as there is nobody in the sentence to do the action of ”requiring”. The authors are inviting to look for all instances of the ”... ing” form, and check if there is somebody or something in the sentence to do the action of ”...ing” (and otherwise fix the sentence). PAGE 7 ==== Section 3.2.2 ==== Title : no hyphen between ”tau” and ”jets” L1: ”Identifying” is bad. ”tau-lepton” should be ”tau”. ”flavor” should be ”flavour”. L2: No hyphen between ”c” and ”quarks”. ”Crucial” should be ”important”. ”experiment” should be ”experiments” PAGE 8 ==== Section 3.2.2 ==== Par 2: L3: It is not clear what ”parton” refers to in the Delta R formula. Maybe the authors want to replace it by ”b, tau” ? L6: ”is wrongly” should be ”be wrongly” (subjunctive is in order here). === Section 3.3 === L(N-1) : ”particle-flow candidates” is an undefined concept at this level. PAGE 10 Par 2: L1: ”residual” should be ”neutral” L3: ”automatically” : it is not clear what the meaning of ”automatically”. PAGE 15 === Section 7.1 === Par 1: L1 : ”High Energy” should be ”high energy”; What is the meaning of ”most common” ? How about ”most copious” ? L4: ”two jets originating from one b quark” is possible, but is probably not what the authors want to say. L6: ”the hadronic top-mass” * is jargon, * has one hyphen too many. How about ”the mass of the hadronically-decaying top quark” ? ”We will reconstruct” is bad too. Par 2: L1: ”center” should be ”centre” L5: I am not sure that the ”DELPHESANALYSIS” package is relevant for the clarity of the paper. PAGE 16 Par 1: L4: ”b-tagged” is jargon. ”tagged as originating from the hadronization of a b quark” would be better. L5: ”criteria” should be ”criterion”. L8: While I have no doubt that the signal selection is sensible, I guess that the authors want to say ”sensitive”. L9: Drop ”slight”. L10: ”efficiencies value” should be ”efficiency” PAGE 17 Figure 7, 8, ... : ”ref.” should be ”Ref.” === Section 7.2 === L1: ”Searching the Higgs particle produced via VBF, and decaying to a bbbar pair” is the climax of improper use of English. * ”Searching” is bad because there is nobody to do the action of searching in the sentence. * The correct use of ”to search” is ”to search for”. * ”decaying” is bad, because the readers thinks that it applies to the same missing person that does the action of ”searching [for]”, and that later ”decays”. I would like to re-iterate the suggestion to ask a native English speaker to read and fix the paper throughout. PAGE 19 Par 2 L1: ”figure 10” should be ”Fig. 10”