practice talks: DISCRETE - Alexander Glazov and Radek Zlebcik
2024,1121
https://indico.belle2.org/event/13593/
=====================================================================================================
Sasha Glazov: Studies of b→s transitions with Belle and Belle II
attendee: Sasha, Sayan, Jing-Ge
Time: 25'+5' ---> practice talk 26'29"
. Since you cover both Belle and Belle II data, maybe it is better
to include the Belle on title page, or at least add the Belle data size on p3.
. If possible, I would suggest to find another font for gamma in the title of slide
(the current one looks more like a "y".)
. p3, the integrated luminosity for Y(4S) and total.
(Maybe these do not need to be the most updated one right before your talk,)
. p9, 394 --> 694 for Belle data
. p10, rho tau --> rho gamma
. questions from Sayan (already answered by Sasha during the meeting)
are you saying in slide 11 that pi0 and electron reconstruction is better in belle2 than lhcb?
slide 16 semileptonic tag is better. if there is any ongoing work at belle2, should it be mentioned?
sorry on slide 7, why is rho heavier than K* in Mkpi?
offline comments:
From: Slavomira Stefkova <sstefkov@uni-bonn.de>
Pg 12: Useful for (semi) inclusive B → X ll and B → Xνν measurements
→ Useful as a control channel for (semi) inclusive B → X ll and B → Xνν measurements
Pg 12: spectator -> companion B (to use the same jargon as on pg 18)
Pg 18: Presented at ICHEP 2024 --> ICHEP 2024 (again so that it is the same as on pg 19)
Pg 19: more categories → tau channels (since categories is not really defined)
Pg 21: combined analysis of B →𝜌t →? I guess you meant B →𝜌 gamma instead?
=======================================================================================================
Radek Zlebcik: Studies of CP violation at Belle and Belle II
attendee: Radek, Jing-Ge
Time: 15 (including Q&A) --> practice talk 13'45"
. I would suggest to practice more times to make if more fluent.
. A similar situation of the font for "gamma" in your slides.
Maybe it is better to find another one to make it not so like a "y".
. p1, (physical) --> (physics)
. p4, I suggest to change 0.5x10^35 to 0.47x10^35 if you want to have the same orders of magnitude as the target one.
. p5, Maybe it is better to note the boost value, gamma, for SuperKEKB
. p10, Though the audience might understand what "BG" is from your oral speech,
I would suggest just to write it as "background", or just remove "BG" in that sentence
. p13, I think you can quote the latest result in the paper draft (currently under CWR1-->CWR2 phase)
. p18, You emphasized that, by the current results, Belle II cab not compete with LHCb,
then maybe you need to prepare an answer what the plan is for Belle II.
(Radek: Get more data, to do our best, and be as a double check of LHCb results).
. p19, I would suggest to rephrase the last bullet.
I think the current plan, for run 2024a, is to get data as more as possible.
"a lot of running time dedicated to the accelerator stuies" might give a wrong impression
we sacrificed the beam time, which is supposed for physics commissioning, to do machine studies.
. For a 15 (12+3 in general) talk, 19 pages might be a little too many.
In some pages, you have a lot of information to digest.
You can read some key numbers in those pages to have more time for people to understand the content.
Make your talk more fluent and save time for some not-so-important pages,
e.g. p4, if someone else already introduced it in the conference, you can spend less time on this page.
p7, p11, p15 are good pages for separation, each one just needs less than 5 seconds.
offline:
From: Thibaud Humair <thibaud.humair@desy.de>
I would suggest you add the new alpha measurement with B-> rho+ rho-, which is now in CWR2 and was presented in Blois :
here is the link to the indico
https://indico.cern.ch/event/1467367/
password: blois
I imagine you can probably remove older things…
