Changes between Version 5 and Version 6 of Private/RefereeComments/Section_6
- Timestamp:
- Oct 4, 2013, 4:33:43 PM (11 years ago)
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
- Modified
-
Private/RefereeComments/Section_6
v5 v6 7 7 and the other for muons, the authors should state it clearly. 8 8 9 >>> the last sentence has been changed to make the statement more clear. 10 9 11 Footnote: this statement deserves a complete section, with the list of 10 12 parameters used in the default CMS and ATLAS configurations, as well 11 13 as possible explanations as to why this parameter choice was made, and a 12 14 comparison with the actual CMS and ATLAS resolutions and granularities. 15 16 >>> The authors disagree with this comment. The reasons are: 17 18 >>>- the resolutions in the Delphes CMS and ATLAS cards are directly taken from CMS and ATLAS. 19 >>>- the resolutions from CMS and ATLAS are taken directly from the cited papers, and it would be redundant to quote there here. 20 >>>- the only possible difference is in the calorimeters granularity. Both the CMS and ATLAS configurations in Delphes use the granularity of the HCAL detector. As said in the calorimeter section, the ECAL granularity is exactly the same as the HCAL >>> granularity in Delphes. This comment has now been added in the "jet and met"validation sub-section". A table with the actual HCAL granularity of the LHC experiments (already public in the relevant technical design reports of CMS and ATLAS) >>> would be of poor interest to the reader and redundant. 13 21 14 22 PAGE 13 … … 17 25 18 26 * It is not clear what the grey bands are in this plot. Shouldn’t they be removed? In CMS, they are supposed to cover differences between the simulation and the data in CMS, not the difference between Delphes and CMS. This comment is valid for all plots. Strangely enough, the ATLAS fred band width is way smaller than that for CMS. Does it represent the same thing ? 27 >>> the grey bands mean indeed different things in the left and right plots. The caption has been extended in order to explain the details required by the referee. 19 28 * For all plots, it is important to have the statistical uncertainty bars indicated, or to state that they are covered by the size of the markers. In the latter case, an explanation is needed for the apparent scatter of the DELPHES points, and to compare this scatter with the input resolution function. 29 >>> The apparent scatter is just due to the fact the the parametrisation of the resolution is binned, and has been chosen to match approximately that of CMS and ATLAS. The choice was made to adopt round values which may result in the apparent scatter. As these plots are just an illustration of a parametrisation which is correct by construction, we believe that no further explanation is needed. 20 30 * For all plots, label, legends, etc... are way too small to be readable. 31 >>> this comment has been addressed for all the plots. 32 21 33 22 34 Figure 4 … … 26 38 resolution. It seems that DELPHES parametrized the Gaussian width of the 27 39 core of the CMS resolution, rather than the effective 68% width. 40 41 >>> the referee is correct, the electron resolution was parametrized with the Gaussian width, since the resolution in Delphes is Gaussian by construction. By proceeding this way we are voluntarily neglecting the tails effects in Delphes. 28 42 29 43 PAGE 14 … … 37 51 * why does the PF curve show a discontinuity between the 1st and 2nd points ? 38 52 53 >>> This plot has been re-done. The HCAL calorimeter resolution has been set to the actual CMS resolution, and the energy-flow implementation is as explained in Section 2.3. 54 >>> As a result we have a perfect agreement at all medium and high pt values. At low pt there is a discrepancy for 20<pt<30 which is not understood. However we believe this discrepancy to have very low impact on physics analyses, that most often 55 >>> consider jets with pt > 30. The small discrepancy observed in the 30 > pt > 40 GeV bin is ~1% in resolution. This comments have been added in the text. 56 39 57 Once the effects are understood, it would be important to fix the imple- 40 58 mentation in DELPHES. These differences are important for data analysis, … … 42 60 studies (of particular importance if DELPHES is used to define the upgrade 43 61 strategy of the expensive LHC detectors). 62 63 >>> addressed. However, the referee, as well as the LHC experiments, should be aware that any study performed with Delphes should be understood as preliminary. A Delphes based study should be perfomed after a pure parton-level and before 64 >>> a geant based fast or full-simulation study. As a result, the authors are perfectly happy with an agreement with a few percents in the physics object resolutions. 44 65 45 66 == Section 6.3 == … … 131 152 example, it seems the CMS fast simulation deals pretty well with the high 132 153 pile-up produced by LHC in 2012. 133
