GROUP 8
-------

This was a clear first class effort overall. The group functioned very
well and produced good results, and well written and on the whole
clear report, and a very well organised and attractive web page.  The
work on understanding the theory, making root work and finding &
modifying the event display were challenging and were carried out very
well. The weakest point was the explanation of the material at "A
level" level on the web page (and in fact in the presentation they
barely managed to explain it to their peers, though the report is
stronger on this).

General group performance:
Overall mark:                80%
Individual marks:  Ben       82%
                   Tom       80%
                   Jean-Seb  70%
		   Paul      75%
		   Brian     60%

Report:
Overall mark:                75%
Individual marks:  Ben       80%
                   Tom       80%
                   Jean-Seb  65%
		   Paul      80%
		   Brian     60%

I'm assuming the eventual mark an individual gets is the average of
the group+individual mark?

Detailed comments
=================

Assessment by group 7
---------------------
Assessment of this group by group 7 struck me as extremely perceptive
(that is, it agreed completely with my own assessment...)

Assessment of group 1
---------------------
The assessment focussed on actual progress rather than interactions
within the group or methodolgy. Nevertheless they examined the role of
each group member and gave a confident report. This assessment was
proved accurate by the successes of group 1 reported in the talk.

Critical self assessment
------------------------
Again, this seemed very confident, an attitude justified by results.

General on report
-----------------
Problem with possessive apostrophes.

Exec summary: 
-------------
Clearly itemized and terse. Good.

Overview:
---------
Reasonable overview of project although there is some confusion in
that some theoretical background is given here and is disconnected from
section 2. Would have been better merged.

Theory:
-------

Asymptotic freedom ok:Typo on diagram (correct in text).  Very nice
description of quark-parton model.  Kinematics - weak on
pseudorapidity, good on boost etc.  High Q2 - good & clear. Ordering
of the two sections on kinematics is not obvious - they could/should
have been merged. Pseudorapdity section is out of order. Very good on
res/dir.  The section on yJB/yEL/yLUMI is confused. (a difficult cut).

Collection & Analysis of Data
-----------------------------
Good overview. Nice intro to detectors and appropriate detail on control cards and 
variables. Very nice work on events display, well described.

Final Conculsions
-----------------
Fine.

Appendices.
-----------
Lots of good plots which all look sensible.

Brian Abbey
-----------
Edited report.  Wrote overview. (whole of section 1). Weak on theory
and there were holes in the editting.

Ben Peters
----------
Wrote abstract. QP-model section. High Q2. Kinematics (ET, x,y).
Very good grasp of the treory.

Jean-Seb Boulliard
------------------
Asymptotic freedom section. Kinematics (eta). Direct & resolved.
Good grip of theory but not as strong as Ben's.

Paul Price
----------
Analysis overview. Orange. Root. I think he played the major part in
getting it going, though Tom helped.

Tom Trevethan
-------------
Detector sections. Event display. His work on the event display was
original and very good.