Reviews for the velopix mask cluster

# Reviews for the velopix mask cluster - [ ] Reviewer 1: - [x] the conclusions are very brief and could include a discussion of the origin of observed differences between performance of both presented clustering algorithms as well the importance of the observed performance characteristics for application to the VELO detector - [x] While straightforward in case of accuracy, it is not clear from the text what is the importance of performance metrics discussed in Figs. 3 and 4 from the point of view of operation of the detector. - [x] Introduction: "search for B-flavoured physics" should rather be e.g. "study of B-flavour physics" - [x] Introduction: "International Space Station" should be preceded with "the" - [ ] (mwm - not really) Results:"realistic clusters of masks" should perhaps be "realistic masks of clusters"? - [x] Results: "more overall old clusters" is not clear; "old clusters" should be defined before - [x] Conclusions: "Also, to our knowledge is one of" should be "Also, to our knowledge it is onXe of" - [x] Conclusions: "unsupervised techniques" should be "unsupervised learning techniques" - [x] Conclusions: "test of this work will take after" should be "test of this work will take place after" - [x] Conclusions: "We hope that this method may be of use ..." - This statement does not fit the scientific style; please replace it with a more specific discussion of the applicability of this method to other sensors. - [x] Please increase the size of axis titles, tick labels and legends of all plots to be comparable with the text size of the body of the article. - [x] Captions of Figures 1 and 2 are missing introductory sentences generally describing their contents before a detailed explanation. E.g. for Fig. 1, it could be (if the reviewer's understanding is correct): - [x] "Figure 1: Noisy pixel locations and identified clusters in two subsequent calibrations (left to right). Clusters labelled..." - [x] (similarly for Figure 2.) - [x] Figure 1:The figure should be referenced from the text in addition to being referenced from Fig. 2 caption. - [x] Figure 1:What does the color scale indicate? - [x] Figure 1:Please consider inverting the color scale to enhance readability in print. - [x] Fig3: Please add axis labels to the plots. - [x] Fig3: Please indicate clearly which panel refers to OPTICS and which to DBSCAN. - [x] What do different plot colors represent? - [x] fig 4: Please add axis labels to the plots. - [x] fig 4: Please indicate clearly which panel refers to OPTICS and which to DBSCAN. - [ ] Reviewer 2 - [x] Section 2: "max(core − distance(o), distance(o, p)" --> missing parenthesis - [x] Figure 1 is mentioned in the caption of Figure 3 but not in the text. - [ ] Editors - [x] Include author names, with affiliations in the format: name of institution/university, mailing address, postal code and city, country. - [x] Add keywords below the abstract - [x] Enlarge the labels in Fig. 2, 3, 4 (barely visible) and add the missing axis titles - [x] Arabic numbers are used for numbering the figures and equations while Roman numerals for the tables – please apply - [x] In the main text, they should be quoted in abbreviated form, like Fig. 4 -> Please, apply in your manuscript - [x] Add DOIs of cited articles, wherever applicable - [x] Change bibliography for APPA style: list of authors names, The Journal volume, page (year), DOI. - [x] Please, send us the signed copyright transfer form (attached to this e-mail) - [ ] Senior Editors - [x] Since the submitted proceedings is a contribution to the special issue from the Jagiellonian Symposium on Advances in Particle Physics and Medicine, The authors are encouraged to broaden the introduction and describe the perspective of their evelopment for that application in medical diagnostics. E.g. in the emerging field of multi-photon positron emission tomography described recently in https://lnkd.in/eJGU6Rax and https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-25905-9 ------------------------------ORIGINAL TEXT --------------------- ``` Reviewer 1: The article presents an algorithm for identification of noisy pixel clusters in the upgraded VELO pixel detector for LHCb. Two general clustering methods are presented and their performance is compared using simulated noisy pixel masks. The article is well written and methods are presented clearly. However, the conclusions are very brief and could include a discussion of the origin of observed differences between performance of both presented clustering algorithms as well the importance of the observed performance characteristics for application to the VELO detector. While straightforward in case of accuracy, it is not clear from the text what is the importance of performance metrics discussed in Figs. 3 and 4 from the point of view of operation of the detector. Finally, the figures need some improvements to their readability and descriptions (please see detailed comments below). Moreover, I have several comments to the text and figures listed below: Introduction: "search for B-flavoured physics" should rather be e.g. "study of B-flavour physics" "International Space Station" should be preceded with "the" Results: "realistic clusters of masks" should perhaps be "realistic masks of clusters"? "more overall old clusters" is not clear; "old clusters" should be defined before Conclusions: "Also, to our knowledge is one of" should be "Also, to our knowledge it is onXe of" "unsupervised techniques" should be "unsupervised learning techniques" "test of this work will take after" should be "test of this work will take place after" "We hope that this method may be of use ..." - This statement does not fit the scientific style; please replace it with a more specific discussion of the applicability of this method to other sensors. Figures - general remarks: Please increase the size of axis titles, tick labels and legends of all plots to be comparable with the text size of the body of the article. Captions of Figures 1 and 2 are missing introductory sentences generally describing their contents before a detailed explanation. E.g. for Fig. 1, it could be (if the reviewer's understanding is correct): "Figure 1: Noisy pixel locations and identified clusters in two subsequent calibrations (left to right). Clusters labelled..." (similarly for Figure 2.) Figure 1: The figure should be referenced from the text in addition to being referenced from Fig. 2 caption. What does the color scale indicate? Please consider inverting the color scale to enhance readability in print. Figure 3: Please add axis labels to the plots. Please indicate clearly which panel refers to OPTICS and which to DBSCAN. What do different plot colors represent? Figure 4: Please add axis labels to the plots. Please indicate clearly which panel refers to OPTICS and which to DBSCAN. Reviewer 2: The manuscript reports about an innovative method for clustering the faulty pixel in the silicon pixel detector Velopix of the LHCb complex. The authors describe the problem as well as the method in a clear way and with the necessary details. I recommend the publication in Acta Physica Polonica A after two minor corrections: - Section 2: "max(core − distance(o), distance(o, p)" --> missing parenthesis - Figure 1 is mentioned in the caption of Figure 2 but not in the text. Editors: Dear author, please add/modify the following: Include author names, with affiliations in the format: name of institution/university, mailing address, postal code and city, country. Add keywords below the abstract Enlarge the labels in Fig. 2, 3, 4 (barely visible) and add the missing axis titles Arabic numbers are used for numbering the figures and equations while Roman numerals for the tables – please apply In the main text, they should be quoted in abbreviated form, like Fig. 4 -> Please, apply in your manuscript Add DOIs of cited articles, wherever applicable Change bibliography for APPA style: list of authors names, The Journal volume, page (year), DOI. Please, send us the signed copyright transfer form (attached to this e-mail) Senior Editors: Since the submitted proceedings is a contribution to the special issue from the Jagiellonian Symposium on Advances in Particle Physics and Medicine, The authors are encouraged to broaden the introduction and describe the perspective of their development for that application in medical diagnostics. E.g. in the emerging field of multi-photon positron emission tomography described recently in https://lnkd.in/eJGU6Rax and https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-25905-9 ```