Difference between revisions of "Instrument Paper Comment"

From CMB-S4 wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
 
(20 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 15: Line 15:
  
 
=== Telescope design ===
 
=== Telescope design ===
# comments
+
# Table 2-1: BICEP array, BICEP3, SPIDER info need to be added (Lorenzo: by 6/1/2017 morning)
  
 
=== Receiver optics ===
 
=== Receiver optics ===
# The beginning of section 3.6 has a long, useful introduction. Sections 3.5 and 3.7 are much more terse. I kinda liked the 3.6 intro...
+
# Improved Sections 3.5 and 3.7 intro? (Jeff)
# 3.3.3, 1st paragraph: "Teflon has a higher frequency cuto and..." -> "cutoff"
 
# 3.3.3, 1st paragraph again: "Nylon has a lower frequency cutooff but..." -> "cutoff"
 
# 3.3.3, 2nd paragraph: BICEP3 in 3rd sentence should have small caps for 'ICEP' -- is there an alias for that? Not critical, but here and there in the whole doc BICEP doesn't have small caps, perhaps a search and replace would be nice
 
  
 
=== Focal plane optical coupling ===
 
=== Focal plane optical coupling ===
# The hyphenation usage is still a mess: band-width, bandwidth, band with, is one example, but there are many more. 
+
# capture CLASS technology (waiting for input from Karwan: by 6/1/2017 noon)
#  The use of the oxford comma is inconsistent
 
#  Is it “a” with bandwidth ratio (e.g., "3:1 bandwith ratio” or “a 3:1 bandwidth ratio”)?
 
  
 
=== Focal plane sensor and readout ===
 
=== Focal plane sensor and readout ===
# Section 5.5.3 - This section is the first section that mentions technology/production status level; other technologies described above did not include a discussion of PS/TSL. Consistency
+
# comment
# is \cite{doyle} =\cite{doyle08}? in mkids.tex?
 
# MUSTANG2 and NIST have enhanced the ROACH framework to include this capability for \umux\.% \comred{(cite)}.
 

Latest revision as of 09:32, 1 June 2017

Please add comments in appropriate section: You can also send comments to Aritoki Suzuki at asuzuki@berkeley.edu

LATEX style

  1. Bunch of \newcommand (and similar) defined after \begin{document} in the cmbs4_instbook.tex, although it doesn't seem to cause any failures, it feels like many of those commands should live in the preamble. See for example the ADS abbreviations. It would be useful to clean up this file to improve readability. I think it generally makes it easier for people to contribute to the document.

General comment

  1. comments

Acronym Table: Bibliography

  1. comments

Introduction and Conclusion

  1. comments

Telescope design

  1. Table 2-1: BICEP array, BICEP3, SPIDER info need to be added (Lorenzo: by 6/1/2017 morning)

Receiver optics

  1. Improved Sections 3.5 and 3.7 intro? (Jeff)

Focal plane optical coupling

  1. capture CLASS technology (waiting for input from Karwan: by 6/1/2017 noon)

Focal plane sensor and readout

  1. comment