Hi Wolfgang,
please find below a first bunch of comments:
Introduction:
------------
* The consistency of the CKM matrix is tested by measuring its angles and sides?
You should use the term Unitarity Trianle (UT). It is not the full CKM
matrix you are testing this way
In the following, it is not clear that |Vub| determines one of the sides
of the UT.
Recoil Method
-------------
* It is not almost background free: you have to subtract a sizeable background
on a statistical basis. The point is of course that you can subtract
this background.
Charm suppression
-----------------
* You mention the q2-cut as a mean to suppress charm BG.
You should add that this cut is used to reduce the uncertainty from
shape function parameter variations.
* optimise cuts: Here you should be more specific.
It is a balance between stat, sys and theo.
Fitting mX vs. q2
-----------------
* Since ICHEP04 we have as a new development the use of BLNP as nicely
discussed in Concezio's CKM05 talk.
Exclusive B->Xulnu
------------------
* ~10 events in 80 fb^-1 refers to what?
* When making a statement about form factor calculation tests
you need to say that one is able to reconstruct the q^2 spectrum.
BTW: the test can only be done for the shape but not for the
normalization
Summary
-------
* Vub -> V_ub
* Say that it is from two methods: mX and mX-q^2
* varius -> various
* There is likely a more recent plot which compares these results
when using the most up-to-date theoretical input.
Bob can give you more input on this.
Cheers,
Heiko
