From: clidman (clidman@eso.org)
Date: Thu Jul 10 2003 - 20:31:38 PDT
Hi Rob,
I have minor comments/suggestions for the paper.
Abstract, p. 3. "low-reddening subset" - This is awkward. How about
"low-extinction subset" instead.
Section 1, 4th para., p. 5. "propagated uncertainties" - Perhaps, just
"uncertainties".
Section 2.2, 7th para, p. 12. "be treated" -> "are treated"
Section 2.4, p17. In the itemized lists, it might be worth stating
explicitly that the 0.17 (0.11 in the second list) magnitudes of
intrinsic dispersion is the dispersion of the inferred absolute
magnitude of type Ia SNe.
Section 2.5, 2nd para., p 18. "For analyses ..." -> "For the analyses ..."
Section 3, 2nd para., p 19. "...for negative values of E(B-V) a peak
at E(B-V)~0 with roughly 50% of the probability, and then an ..." ->
"...for negative values of E(B-V), a peak at E(B-V)~0 with roughly 50%
of the probability, and an ..." I've added a comma and removes a "then".
Section 4.1, 4th para. p 21. "In the top row ... Figure 8." -> "The
primary fits of Figure 8. are reproduced in the top row of Figure 9."
Section 4.2, 1st para. p22. "does not have a confirming spectral type
identifications" -> "was not confirmed spectrally."
Section 5.5, 2nd para. p30. "an situation" -> "a situation".
Section 6, 1st para. p 36. "low-mass flat" -> "low-mass, flat" or
"flat, low-mass".
Section 6, 1st para. p 36. "improve the controls on the" -> "reduce".
Caption to Fig. 12, p. 55. "Rows (a)-(d)" -> "Rows (a)-(c)". The filled
contours in fits (d) and (e) are fit 6.
Final comment. Fits 1,2 and 3 (Table 8) agree very well. Part of this
must be becaause there are 18 low redshift SNe that are common to all three.
Cheers, Chris.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jul 10 2003 - 19:30:06 PDT