Radiative Recombination Studies for Bare Lead Ions Interacting with Low-Energy Electrons
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript presents the first measured x-ray spectrum with high precision for RR process of bare lead at ESR-CRYRING. The characteristic transitions from H-like lead were analyzed and compared with a theoretical model. non-statistic population of L-RR was observed. good agreement between experiments and model calculation was found.
Typos and Minor points for revisions:
Line 11: I think the authors want to point out 'population dynamics', not the 'population kinetics'
Line 47: is it better to insert (Ge(i)) after the phrase 'high-purity germanium detectors'?
Line 54: 'level' should be 'levels'
Page 3, the 1st line: figure 3 should be figure 2
Line 59: 'spped' should be 'speed'
Question to figure 2: which spectrum (a) or (b) is measured at zero degree?
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors present radiative recombination and other lines spectra of
bare lead ions interacting with low-energy electrons. The study is
interesting academically. However, authors present little physics of
the spectral analysis and do not provide the any broad view of the work.
Some points for needed clarity are given below.
1. Give detail explanations of the spectral analysis. It is not
explained how the authors are identifying the lines.
2. Figure 2, black curve is not visible. The authors can scale the y-axix
below 0 for clarity and use another color for the curve to be visible.
3. Below Figure 2, Authors' statement "It can be observed that the
calculated photon energies
with Doppler shift correction show a good agreement with the corresponding
experimental values and it is easy to identify numerous transition processes
as marked in figure 2." does not have an interpretation or explanation.
4. Provide information oh How the RR rate coefficients were calculated.
5. Provide information how cascading were taken in to account and starting
from what levels.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript has been improved by the authors.
However, it needs some more information and explanation of sentences
made by the authors for the validity of the statements.
1. Page 2,3: Explain why it is mentioned that "RR* cross sections are
not computed in the sentence "Therefore, it is more practical to introduce
so called RR rate coefficient αnlj instead of the RR cross section σnlj
which is appropriate for a fixed electron beam velocity."
2. How did you the get cross sections for the alpha integral?
3. Page 3: Explain names of the routine, package and approximation in
quoting the information "we follow the routine as discussed in
detail elsewhere [17,18]."
4. Page 3: Explain how you got the simulated x-ray spectra in sentence
"Comparisons of the simulated x-ray spectra with the experimental
measurements at 0â—¦ and 180â—¦ observation angles recorded by two Ge(i)
detectors are displayed in figure 2." Give the name and some details
of the package used.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 2 Report
The presentation of the paper has been improved for publication.
