Selected Results in Heavy-Quark Fragmentation
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Abstract: ...bottom...quark production.in e^+e^- annihilation...
perturbatine...-. As you see in Figure 1 (b) in the attached
file:Higgs-Production-Via-Electron-Positron-Collisions-21.pdf
bottom quark production via e^+e^- annihilation is both
perturbative and non-perturbative. e^+e^- annihilate via the
production of a photon, which is non-perturbative, while
b-quark--b-antiquark dind via a coupling that is about
1000 times astonger than the electromagnetic foce, as is shown
in the two gs below the Figure and can be found in Ref[6],
Particle Physics Booklet 2020. Therefore, since Gennaro Corcella
did not mention that non-perbuative theory is needed for heavy
quark state production in the Abstract it is very misleading
to any reader.
1. Introduction: Gennaro Corcella gave many references but did not
give any references to articles describing non-perturbative
theoreticsl methods, such as Schifman et. al,, Nucl Phys
B147, 385 an b147, 448 (1979).
2. Perturbative calculations...3.Non-perturbative...fragmentation
give not-well-defined Eqs(1,...,10) with no explanation of
how his Figure 1 is obtained. His definition of the important
quantity Q in the Introduction "Q the process hard scale" does
not inform the reader of the true nature of Q. After Figure 1
in the attached .pdf fle it is shown from the PPB 2020 that
heavy quark production requires an interaction about 1,000
times stronger than electomagnetic interastions. Many processes
in the manuscript by Gennaro Corcella are non-perturbative.
4. Results-B production and 5. Results-D production with 8
not-well-defined figures with
results that are not well-defined, and some of them not defined
probably could not be understood by a reader.
6. Conclusions: "...short overiew..." was certainly nor "short".
Also the Conclusions do not explain the (not well-defined)
results in sections 2 through 5.
To summarize my review of the manuscript by Gennaro Corcella:
I believe that this manuscript should not be published by
Universe or any jounal.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
I believe that the tone of this report is not appropriate and I am not going to reply to it. I remind that I was invited by the editors to write this review on heavy-quark fragmentation and I am happy that they decide whether they still think that it is a topic which deserves publication in Universe or not.
Reviewer 2 Report
This article presents a short overview of a heavy-quark fragmentation
function. As an effective approach for the non-perturbative corrections,
a parameter-dependent hadronization model or an effective coupling constant
are reviewed.
This article is a good summary of the recent development of heavy-quark
fragmentation. I recommend the publication of this article after correcting
the following minor issues.
o 'massless spectrum' at p2 means the massless quark approximation?
o Define 'N' at line 89.
o Define 'x_B' and 'x' below 176.
o Fig.5 is small.
Author Response
I thank the reviewer for his/her comments. I clarified on page 2 that the calculation is in the massless approximation. I defined N and added footnote 2 for the purpose of the Mellin transform. I defined xB in Eq.(11) on page 6 and clarified that by x I meant xb. I enlarged Fig.5.
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper is a very good review of the current state of the art in heavy quark fragmentation. I did notice one small typo (on page 7, between equations 11 and 12, mu --> \mu).
My only really relevant comment is that while it may be outside of the scope of this paper, there has been interesting work on fragmentation to heavy quarkonium. It may be useful to the general reader to reference that. (I am thinking of work from Braaten, Yuan, Fleming, Leibovich, Mehen, etc.)
Author Response
I wish to thank the referee for his/her nice comments. I have added references to quarkonium fragmentation on page 2 and references [20-22] in the bibliography. I also added Ref.[3] on the so-called Peterson fragmentation function.
