评委老师的问题及建议：
- 刘坤老师：
- 报告内容需要精简，论文中的内容不一定都要写
- motivation部分增加dark photon已有实验的overview，引出我们dark shine实验，体现fix on target 找missing momentum的创新性
- 加一些不同实验的探测器装置图辅助说明暗光子探测方法及特点
- 关于DarkSHINE实验对ECAL设计的要求还要在开头地方再强调一下
- 梅华林老师：
- 报告和文章需要强调实验对visible part的测量，通过测viaible part来达到测量missing energy的需求
- LYSO本征光产额和实际探测到光产额直接的差距，为什么会衰减这么多，增加描述
- 把不同的重点问题和相关的结果连起来讲，突出工作的重要性
- 向昕老师：
- 报告内容太多，重点不突出，要体现highlight。再多联系presentation，不要一直对着屏幕讲，和要观众有眼神接触
- 对于overall design requirement，在最后总结的时候加一个table，展示所有requirements都被满足了
- 电子学test bench中二极管有没有准直？
- 探测器分辨率smear为什么是高斯的？
- 分辨率拟合为什么只用到两项，没用到噪声项？
- 郭军老师：
- 报告中有些地方说的太快、文本句子过长，需要简练一下
- specification只有针对ECAL，缺少整体探测器系统中的specificaion的考虑，否则看起来有些孤立
- 对于分辨率的要求，建议先从总体上提前给出一个要求，然后进入讨论每一项的约束
- 怎么得到abc参数要求这几个数值的？
- 杨海军老师：
- 创新点不够明显，比如强调missing energy的方法、和国际上其它实验的区别，强调ECAL在实验中的作用
- 细节部分可以放到backup，主要是要把整个故事讲明白
- beamline的地方需要加一页，并说明说要在SHINE基础之上增加一条新的beamline
- 探测器图使用最新的加了sideHCAL的图
- 报告中需要强调对某些工作的发表文章，不要都集中到最后一页展示
- CEPC工作也需要强调亮点，为什么用晶体ECAL，对比不同的探测器方案（包括CEPC、FCC），强调crystal ECAL的优势。其它地方也需要把亮点和创新点体现出来
- 既然对光量要求不高，为什么不选择其它晶体？
观众问题及建议：
Pros:
[ ] Very nice slides.
[ ] Space is very well used.
[ ] Clear texts and pictures.
[ ] Scene presence is very good too.
[ ] English is clear.
Cons:
[ ] maybe some important things said orally could be added on figures-only slides?
[ ] Hard to say from the presentation (I am currently at slide 31): "What did Zhiyu do himself during his PhD, on a personal level. What is your contribution to the project(s)? How is it important?"
Neutral:
[ ] Are all pictures sourced? If made by yourself, no sourcing needed. But if important and made by self, should be said maybe?
Slide 4: as a general comment "if something is in the slide, it should be introduced" . So what are the three aspects that infer the existence of DM here?
Slide 5 (and others): Same for notations. If variable in slides, it should be introduced if possible. What is H, \chi, \sigma ... etc (by the way next slide there is another H, but with a different meaning)
Slide 6: typo? Blue part, \epsilon added to in the L_int? And a prime in the A variable?
Slide 10: "actively produce dark matter..." do they? Or do we wish they do?
Slide 12 [minor] choice of color: light blue, is it the stipped lines on the cube? Looks like it would be the hidden part of the detector
Slide 18, repeated in slide 20: explain the plus sign notation used here? Or mention it orally. Quadratic summed should be explicit.
Constant b dominates in high regime only, due to his low value I assume? What if it is overall already higher than the 2 others? So it is experimentally studied behavior then?
Slide 21: write explicitely that this is Azimov's significance formula. The A index is not enough imo. Also, what is a significance? (Not introduced here). What is S? What is B?
Slide 22: Limit sup is 4 GeV but right plot stops at 1000MeV. Why?
Slide 23: Cut on what? Maybe said orally.
Slide 24: right plot. Relative difference could be put in absolute value? Or is there an educated reason why not? Also, why is the right top plot so good and the bottom shows difference? Could there be a rescale of the top plot ?
Slide 36: plot on the right: grid looks to be in log/log, but no indication of the log in the axis names/unit parts.
Slide 39: "electron-positron", but you write it in the inverse order e+e- in the sentence right below.
Slide 40: bottom figure: dimension of "24X_0" what is this?
Slide 41: "my work" only said orally. Needs to be explicitly written in the slide.
Slide 44: Triggers and crystals have same-ish graphical representation. Is it done on purpose?
General question Slide 48: 3 setups, same "input" named "SC-16...". Different last column. Quite simular for the two first, almost 3/2 for the last. How can you explain this? What would be the reason?
Slide 50: energy resolution [...] : why do you use "%" here? Percentage of what? These are constants right?
Why skipping the summary??? Outlook is far less interesting for your PhD defense than the summary of your work.
