Matthew Wing is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: H1+ZEUS+NNLOJET paper
Time: Aug 24, 2021 02:00 PM Amsterdam, Berlin, Rome, Stockholm, Vienna
Join Zoom Meeting
Meeting ID: 964 1059 5932
One tap mobile
+16699006833,,96410595932# US (San Jose)
+19292056099,,96410595932# US (New York)
Dial by your location
+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
+1 929 205 6099 US (New York)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
Meeting ID: 964 1059 5932
Find your local number: https://ucl.zoom.us/u/ab0JvGDKmE
Minutes and Decisions of EB2 - 24.8.21
I. Abt, A. Cooper-Sarkar, K. Wichmann
B. Foster, T. Gehrmann, C. Gwenlan, S. Schmitt, M. Sutton, M. Wing, Z. Zhang
A full update of the analysis was presented to the collaborations.
- The analysers, Katarzyna and Mandy, were thanked for the re-analysis
and updated results.
- The NNLOJet group was thanked for the new NNLO QCD calculations.
- The editor, Iris, was thanked for the updates to the paper draft.
The editorial board meeting focused on the presentation of the results in the
paper draft and discussed significant issues with the draft.
All figures were modified according to the decisions of EB1
-- Are there any further issues?
== ratio plots on PDFs
-- Figures 7/8/9/10 stay
-- ZZ: new plot:
-- total uncertainties and ratios of all 4 PDFs (uv, dv, g and sea)
-- we looked at a first version of this at 10 GeV^2:
== no extra information obtained
--> internal material for 10GeV^2
style of Fig.4 for NNLO and JetsNNLO
ratio plot with total uncertainties
The text [content] was modified according to the decisions of EB1.
== Are there any further issues as far as content is concerned?
-- SS:line 305-311: I have great difficulties to understand that text.
My proposal would be to remove this, or to say something more
simple. Maybe like this:
For jet cross section predictions, a variation of alpha_s is
similar to a scale variation, and HERAPDF2.0Jets is made available
for two different choices of fixed alpha_s.
Nevertheless, a cross check ...
==> EB2 Decision: Keep it in and Iris and Thomas to consider improving
and some citations will be included if appropriate.
-- comparison with past results; lines 278 -- 291
the red stuff goes.
Should the rest stay or just be replaced with their is broad
agreement with previous results?
==> EB2 Decision: keep as it as far as numbers are concerns
and add senteneces on consistency.
Include NNLOJet result from their erratum.
-- MS: confused by description between lines 34 and 35
==> EB2 decison: Keep paragraph -- rephrase to make it clearer
-- TBD with AMCS, KK & MS
-- TG: line 47
It is only a standard assumption
==> EB2 decision:
l.46 In addition --> even if this assumption is valid. == out
new text: In addition --directly--> might be biased ...
-- BF: line 40
explicit inclusion of heavy quark data sets
line 78 to 82
sounds like we excluded data -- has to be avoided.
The text has changed considerably. Thus, the edior will go through
the textual comments and check what is still relevant and decide
what to implement and what to dicuss at the reading.
Individual Emails have been/will be sent.
The following timeline was agreed:
- Comments on the text should be sent by 31 August.
- IA will work on a new version to be circulated to the EB by ~20 September.
- The EB will have one week to look at the new draft, so by 27 September.
- The paper will be circulated to the collaborations by 11 October.
- We expect to have the presentation to the collaborations in the week starting
- We expect to have the reading of the paper in the week starting 25 October.