Star-fst-l mailing list

[Xu Sun <xusun AT impcas.ac.cn>]

Hi All,

We have received 1st round of comments for FST NIM paper.

Please find it below. We will work with PAs to address those comments.

Best,

Xu

Begin forwarded message:

From: Daniela Bortoletto <em AT editorialmanager.com>

Subject: Your Submission

Date: September 18, 2024 at 06:35:32 GMT+8

To: Xu Sun <xusun AT impcas.ac.cn>

Reply-To: Daniela Bortoletto <daniela.bortoletto AT cern.ch>

Ms. Ref. No.: NIMA-D-24-00680
Title: The STAR Forward Silicon Tracker
Nuclear Inst. and Methods in Physics Research, A

Dear Dr. Sun,

I have received the reviewers' comments on your paper that are appended below. They have advised that your manuscript requires a revision before it can be reconsidered for publication. 

If you decide to revise the work, you must submit a list of changes or a rebuttal against each point raised when you submit the revised manuscript. Revisions that do not address reviewer comments point-by-point will not be considered. 

The revision should be submitted by
Nov 16 2024 11:59:59:000PM

Research Elements (optional)
This journal encourages you to share research objects - including your raw data, methods, protocols, software, hardware and more – which support your original research article in a Research Elements journal. Research Elements are open access, multidisciplinary, peer-reviewed journals which make the objects associated with your research more discoverable, trustworthy and promote replicability and reproducibility. As open access journals, there may be an Article Publishing Charge if your paper is accepted for publication. Find out more about the Research Elements journals at https://www.elsevier.com/authors/tools-and-resources/research-elements-journals?dgcid=ec_em_research_elements_email.


With best regards,
Daniela Bortoletto, PhD
Editor
Nuclear Inst. and Methods in Physics Research, A
Your username is: sunxuimp

------------------------------------ NIMA AUTHOR NOTES ---------------------

1. To submit a revision, please go to https://www.editorialmanager.com/nima/default1.aspx to login. You may then type in your user name/password and click "Author Login." Your user name is:  Your username is: sunxuimp .

2. IMPORTANT: While submitting the revised manuscript, please double check the author names provided in the submission so that authorship related changes are made in the revision stage. Any authorship-related change after acceptance will involve approval from co-authors and respective editor handling the submission and this may cause a significant delay in publishing your manuscript.

3.   Data statement: To foster transparency, we encourage you to state the availability of your data in your submission. This may be a requirement of your funding body or institution. If your data is unavailable to access or unsuitable to post, you will have the opportunity to indicate why during the submission process, for example by stating that the research data is confidential. The statement will appear with your published article on ScienceDirect. For more information, visit the Data Statement page.


---------------------------------------------
For further assistance, please visit our customer support site at https://service.elsevier.com/app/home/supporthub/publishing/#authors . Here you can search for solutions on a range of topics, find answers to frequently asked questions and learn more about EM via interactive tutorials. You will also find our 24/7 support contact details should you need any further assistance from one of our customer support representatives.


Reviewers' comments:



Reviewer #1:
The authors should be congratulated on well-written paper that describes many aspects of an inherently involved system. I have a few comments below.

- Since APV chips have a well-known susceptibility to the pinhole presence, it would be useful to comment on a) the presence (if any) of the pinholes in the sensors after fabrication, b) bad/noisy channel occurrences after construction.

- Lines 73-74: the top strip implants are at HV, which is an unusual configuration. It seems you are basically relying on the AC-coupling capacitor to hold off the HV from the APV front-ends. Would be useful to comment on the capacitor tolerance of HV. (I strongly suspect it is not very far from your operational point.)

- Section 3: For many reasons, it would be useful to know the bulk resistivity and the sensor thickness.

- If I understand correctly, the hybrids don't have much in the way of the ground planes. Then it would be useful to comment if you have any oscillations in the module.

- Given the 2nd metal routing, would be good to state if you have any appreciable cross-talk.


- Lines 7-8: This reads as if the approval, construction and commissioning all happened in a single year. This could be true. If not, the sentence would need to be revised.

- Line 24: "oriented along the beamline" sounds ambiguous. It appears that the disk's planes are orthogonal to the beam line.

- Line 55: "by 4 with the chips" A typo?

- Section 3: would be useful to mention how the apparent "roundness" of the top and bottom edges were achieved in practice.

- Figure 3: The CV plot looks unusual. Would be good to specify the test frequency.

- Section 4: would be useful to mention the HV connection and routing on the hybrid (where it goes, any spatial provisions)

- line 97: "schematics" --> "layouts"

- line 126: This is a very useful test, of course. It would help the reader to know how these numbers compare with the expected radiation levels in the experiment.

- line 143 and Figure 7. I couldn't find the distance of 7.5 mm in the Figure. Would it be possible to indicate it explicitly please?

- Section 5.2: would be interesting to know the glues used for bonding the surfaces together.

- Lines 450-451: The leak rates are interesting, of course. But I should note that this was already stated in lines 423-424.





Reviewer #2: Review of NIMA-D-24-00680

Abstract - "efficient signal processing " is rather vague - what is efficient about it?

17 - "separating electrons from photons" - from photon conversions?
20 - Can you provide momentum resolution lots (vs eta or Pt) to what extent is this multiple
scattering dominated?
28 - "ensure peak performance" - what does this mean?
Section 3 - The description of the sensors is very unclear. Something like "4 radial sections
of 128 channels each ..." with a description of the range of channel characteristics
and radial division arcs would help.
I assume that the strips cover a constant Dphi. What pitch range does this correspond to?

You only mention the operating temperature at the end. What motivates this? I assume that
reverse annealing is not a concern and that leakage currents are small enough that shot
noise is not an issue. It would be good to have a concise discussion of these issues.
77 - reach -> reaches
89 - replace "designed"
97 - These are not schematics. They are layouts
What are the maximum and minimum radiation lengths for this design. Can you show a plot of
radiation length vs eta?
Section 5 - What are the temperature goals for the design? How are they related to the expected
fluence?
123 - What is "Soxhlet extraction" - is there a reference?
Section 5.3 - How are the various classes deployed in the detector?
262 - What is the expected random noise for the APV chip for this capacitive load? Did you measure
the coherent and random noise?
278 - What is the nominal position resolution (may have been mentioned earlier)?
290 - Is the APV used in deconvolution mode?
329 - The "ground noise" is indeed quite large. Is this ground loop noise? What is the
coherent noise contribution to the readout? Was there any attempt to isolate the FST
from system ground? A readout block diagram would be more useful than some of the pictures
346 - Move to section 5.1?
Fig 27 - What is the cause of the structure in the noise levels plot?
445 - Why is there no increase in leakage current in Run-23?

There are too many minor English errors to call them out individually. This should be edited
by a native speaker in the collaboration.

This is a useful article but it can be considerably improved by a more coherent discussion
of the operating environment, radiation constraints, and sensor design. It would also benefit
from a discussion of measured noise and coherent and random components.


----------------------------------------------


At Elsevier, we want to help all our authors to stay safe when publishing. Please be aware of fraudulent messages requesting money in return for the publication of your paper. If you are publishing open access with Elsevier, bear in mind that we will never request payment before the paper has been accepted. We have prepared some guidelines (https://www.elsevier.com/connect/authors-update/seven-top-tips-on-stopping-apc-scams ) that you may find helpful, including a short video on Identifying fake acceptance letters (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5l8thD9XtE ). Please remember that you can contact Elsevier s Researcher Support team (https://service.elsevier.com/app/home/supporthub/publishing/) at any time if you have questions about your manuscript, and you can log into Editorial Manager to check the status of your manuscript (https://service.elsevier.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/29155/c/10530/supporthub/publishing/kw/status/).

#AU_NIMA#

To ensure this email reaches the intended recipient, please do not delete the above code

---

In compliance with data protection regulations, you may request that we remove your personal registration details at any time. (Remove my information/details). Please contact the publication office if you have any questions.