pith. sign in

arxiv: 2506.05564 · v3 · submitted 2025-06-05 · ⚛️ nucl-th · astro-ph.HE

Bayesian Inference of the Landau Parameter G'₀ from Joint Gamow-Teller Measurements

Zidu Lin , Gianluca Col\`o , A. W. Steiner , Amber Stinson This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 10:21 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ nucl-th astro-ph.HE
keywords Landau-Migdal parameterGamow-Teller resonanceBayesian inferenceSkyrme RPAspin-isospin interactionnuclear energy density functionalbeta decayneutron star matter
0
0 comments X

The pith

Bayesian analysis of Gamow-Teller resonances in three nuclei extracts the spin-isospin Landau parameter G'_0 as 0.48 with uncertainty 0.034.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper carries out a Bayesian inference to determine the Landau-Migdal parameter G'_0 that sets the strength of the spin-isospin part of the nucleon-nucleon force. It employs a self-consistent Skyrme random phase approximation as the forward model and fits it simultaneously to measured Gamow-Teller resonance data on lead-208, tin-132, and zirconium-90. The central result is lower than the values traditionally obtained from pion-exchange models yet lies close to those in a few Skyrme parametrizations that already incorporate spin-isospin observables. The quantified uncertainty on G'_0 supplies a concrete target for constructing energy density functionals that must describe beta decay, neutrino responses in supernovae, and pion condensation in neutron stars.

Core claim

Using joint experimental constraints from Gamow-Teller resonances in 208Pb, 132Sn, and 90Zr within a self-consistent standard Skyrme RPA framework, the Bayesian posterior for the Landau parameter G'_0 is centered at 0.48 with a standard deviation of 0.034. This value lies nearer to existing Skyrme models that include spin-isospin data than to older estimates derived from pion-exchange pictures, with the difference possibly traceable to the adopted nucleon effective mass.

What carries the argument

Self-consistent Skyrme random phase approximation (RPA) serving as the forward model inside the Bayesian likelihood that maps the single parameter G'_0 to the observed energies and strengths of Gamow-Teller resonances.

If this is right

  • The extracted G'_0 supplies a direct constraint for calculating beta-decay and double-beta-decay matrix elements in medium-mass and heavy nuclei.
  • It modifies predicted neutrino absorption rates in hot dense nucleonic matter relevant to core-collapse supernovae.
  • It shifts the estimated critical density at which pion condensation may occur inside neutron stars.
  • It offers a concrete benchmark for building new Skyrme energy density functionals that treat the spin-isospin channel consistently across finite nuclei and infinite matter.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Adopting this lower G'_0 may push the onset of pion condensation to higher densities than older pion-exchange estimates imply for neutron-star cores.
  • Repeating the same Bayesian procedure with additional nuclei or with measured beta-decay lifetimes would test whether the present uncertainty can be reduced further.
  • The noted sensitivity to effective mass suggests that future functionals should vary both G'_0 and m*/m together when fitting spin-isospin data.

Load-bearing premise

The Skyrme RPA model supplies an accurate enough description of the chosen Gamow-Teller resonances that missing correlations or model deficiencies do not shift the extracted G'_0 by more than the reported uncertainty.

What would settle it

New high-resolution Gamow-Teller strength data on any of the three nuclei that cannot be reproduced by the Skyrme RPA when G'_0 is set near 0.48 would require revision of the inferred central value.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.05564 by Amber Stinson, A. W. Steiner, Gianluca Col\`o, Zidu Lin.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. The distribution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. The posterior distribution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. The dependence of neutrino-nucleon many-body (MB) corrections (defined in Eq. 6) on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The Landau-Migdal parameter $G'_0$ characterizes the main part of the spin-isospin dependent nucleon-nucleon interaction. Consequently, the $G'_0$ is closely related to the Gamow-Teller resonance (GTR), the beta and double-beta decay rates of finite nuclei, the response of hot and dense nucleonic matter that modifies the neutrino-nucleon absorption rates in core-collapse supernovae (CCSNe) and binary neutron star (BNS) mergers, and finally the critical density for pion condensation in neutron stars. In this letter, for the first time, we report the $G'_0$ with quantified uncertainty in the framework of Bayesian inference, using a self-consistent standard Skyrme Random Phase Approximation (RPA) model and joint constraints from experimental GTR measurements on $^{208}\mathrm{Pb}$, $^{132}\mathrm{Sn}$, $^{90}\mathrm{Zr}$. Our extracted $G_0'$ is $0.48\pm0.034$, which is close to the prediction of a few existing Skyrme models that consider spin-isospin observables but smaller than the traditional ones extracted from pion-exchange models. We hint to possible reasons for this deviation, like the value of the nucleon effective mass $\frac{m^*}{m}$. The $G_0'$ values extracted in this work may guide the construction of new energy density functionals that aims to self-consistently describe the dense matter properties in the spin-isospin channel.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the first Bayesian inference of the Landau-Migdal parameter G'_0 using a self-consistent Skyrme RPA forward model jointly constrained by experimental Gamow-Teller resonance data in 208Pb, 132Sn, and 90Zr. The extracted posterior is G'_0 = 0.48 ± 0.034, stated to be consistent with certain spin-isospin-aware Skyrme parametrizations but smaller than traditional pion-exchange values, with a qualitative suggestion that the effective mass m*/m may be responsible.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the work supplies a data-driven, uncertainty-quantified value of G'_0 with direct relevance to beta-decay rates, neutrino opacities in CCSNe and BNS mergers, and the onset of pion condensation. The joint multi-nucleus constraint and explicit Bayesian treatment are strengths that improve upon single-nucleus or ad-hoc extractions.

major comments (2)
  1. [Methods / Bayesian inference section] The likelihood in the Bayesian setup (described in the methods) is constructed from RPA predictions of GTR centroids and strengths; however, the manuscript provides no quantitative propagation of the known systematic offsets from omitted 2p-2h mixing, tensor forces, and particle-vibration coupling (shifts of 1–3 MeV and ~20–30 % quenching). Because these effects enter directly into the forward model that maps G'_0 to the data, the reported ±0.034 uncertainty may be underestimated and the posterior mean biased.
  2. [Discussion] The discussion notes that the extracted G'_0 is smaller than pion-exchange results and hints at the role of m*/m, yet the Skyrme parametrization employed fixes m* at a single value. No sensitivity study or marginalization over this (or other fixed) parameter is presented, leaving open whether the posterior would shift appreciably once m* is allowed to vary consistently with the same data.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states the result is 'close to the prediction of a few existing Skyrme models' but does not name those models or cite the specific parametrizations used for comparison.
  2. [Methods] Notation for the RPA response function and the precise form of the likelihood (Gaussian or otherwise) should be written explicitly with equation numbers for reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address each of the major comments point by point below, providing our responses and indicating the revisions we plan to make.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Methods / Bayesian inference section] The likelihood in the Bayesian setup (described in the methods) is constructed from RPA predictions of GTR centroids and strengths; however, the manuscript provides no quantitative propagation of the known systematic offsets from omitted 2p-2h mixing, tensor forces, and particle-vibration coupling (shifts of 1–3 MeV and ~20–30 % quenching). Because these effects enter directly into the forward model that maps G'_0 to the data, the reported ±0.034 uncertainty may be underestimated and the posterior mean biased.

    Authors: We agree that the systematic effects from 2p-2h mixing, tensor forces, and particle-vibration coupling are important and can influence the GTR properties. Our analysis is performed within the standard Skyrme RPA model, and the reported uncertainty reflects the statistical uncertainty given the model assumptions and the experimental data. We will revise the manuscript to include a dedicated paragraph in the discussion section acknowledging these limitations and explaining that a quantitative propagation would require a more advanced forward model incorporating these effects, which is left for future investigations. This will clarify that the ±0.034 is the uncertainty within the current framework. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Discussion] The discussion notes that the extracted G'_0 is smaller than pion-exchange results and hints at the role of m*/m, yet the Skyrme parametrization employed fixes m* at a single value. No sensitivity study or marginalization over this (or other fixed) parameter is presented, leaving open whether the posterior would shift appreciably once m* is allowed to vary consistently with the same data.

    Authors: The referee correctly notes that our Skyrme parametrization fixes the effective mass ratio m*/m. The qualitative hint in the discussion is based on literature comparisons rather than a direct variation in our model. To strengthen the manuscript, we will perform a limited sensitivity analysis by considering a few alternative Skyrme parametrizations with different m*/m values and recomputing the posterior for G'_0. This will be added to the revised version, allowing us to assess the robustness of our result with respect to this parameter. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Bayesian extraction of G'_0 driven by external GTR data; minor prior-tuning risk only

full rationale

The paper performs Bayesian inference of the Landau parameter G'_0 by treating experimental Gamow-Teller resonance centroids and strengths in 208Pb, 132Sn and 90Zr as independent data constraints. The Skyrme RPA forward model maps the single varied parameter G'_0 to those observables; the posterior is therefore shaped by external measurements rather than by any internal loop that re-uses the same fitted quantities as predictions. No equation in the manuscript equates a derived quantity to its own input by construction, and no self-citation is invoked to justify a uniqueness theorem or to smuggle an ansatz. The only residual circularity risk is the possibility that other Skyrme parameters were previously tuned on related observables, but this does not make the central claim tautological. The derivation remains self-contained against the stated experimental inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central result rests on the accuracy of the Skyrme RPA forward model and on the assumption that the three chosen nuclei provide sufficient independent constraints; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • G'_0
    The Landau-Migdal parameter whose posterior is obtained from the Bayesian analysis of the GTR data.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The standard Skyrme RPA provides a sufficiently accurate description of Gamow-Teller resonances in the selected nuclei.
    This assumption is required to map the experimental data onto a posterior for G'_0.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5809 in / 1419 out tokens · 72498 ms · 2026-05-19T10:21:33.707866+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Core Collapse Supernova Modeling: The Next Ten Years

    astro-ph.HE 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 2.0

    Core collapse supernova models have demonstrated the neutrino shock reheating mechanism in three dimensions but require substantially more rigorous treatments of neutrino kinetics, fluid instabilities, magnetic fields...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 68 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 12 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    probabilistic

    The posterior distribution of Skyrme parameterizations are found by: Ppost({p}) = ∫ L({p})Pprior({p}) d{p}, (3) where {p} is the set of Skyrme parameters and L({p}) is the likelihood constraining the parameter distribution of our model. Given Ppost({p}), we can find the posterior distri- bution of G′ 0 as a function of Skyrme parameters. Note that if we ig...

    work page

  2. [2]

    sam- pled from Bayesian posteriors, and compare it with existing Skyrme models. The correlation between G′ 0 and m0% is ob- served both in the existing Skyrme models (black squares) and in the posterior without constraints of EGT and m0% (col- ored scattering dots). The posterior (black contours) of GTAll shows the pinned-down area favored by GTR measurem...

    work page

  3. [3]

    The black solid curve represents the posterior of G′ 0 from a Bayesian inference including all the aforementioned GTR measurements (GTAll)

    The red dashed, green dashed, orange dashed, and black dashed curves are the posterior of G′ 0 extracted from Bayesian inferences with constraints of only 208Pb (GTPb), only 132Sn (GTSn), only 90Zr (GTZr), and noGT, respectively. The black solid curve represents the posterior of G′ 0 from a Bayesian inference including all the aforementioned GTR measureme...

    work page

  4. [4]

    For the first time, by apply- ing GTR constraints we significantly reduce the uncertainty of MBax due to variation of G′

    work page

  5. [5]

    The neutron skin measurements [46, 50] applied in our Bayesian inference cannot tightly con- strain the symmetry energy and δU at sub-saturation densities

    The remaining uncertainty of MBax mainly comes from the variation of δU = Un − Up at sub-saturation densities and results in a wide spreading of MBax along the vertical axis. The neutron skin measurements [46, 50] applied in our Bayesian inference cannot tightly con- strain the symmetry energy and δU at sub-saturation densities. In the future, stronger co...

    work page

  6. [6]

    The GT spectra are calculated 4 NRAPR SGII SVmin Sly4 Sly5 SV - bas KDE - 0 KDE - 0v1 SAMI SkX SkM * SkO ' SV - sym32 LNS SKRA SQMC700 δ U ( MeV ) 10.0 12.5 15.0 17.5 20.0 22.5 - 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 G' ( n = 0.16 ) MB ax ( ν e , e ) NRAPR SGII SVmin Sly4 Sly5 SV - bas KDE - 0 KDE - 0v1 SAMI SkX SkM * SkO ' SV - sym32 LN...

    work page

  7. [7]

    kinematic fitting

    The color represents the difference of nucleon potentials δU = Un − Up, which is another factor determining the many-body corrections. The νe(n, p)e− , ¯νe(p, n)e+ reactions and the δU examined here are calculated at n= 0.02 fm− 3, T = 10 MeV , incoming neutrino energyEν = 30 MeV and Ye = 0.05. using self-consistent Skyrme QRPA and the GT experiments are ...

    work page doi:10.5281/zen-

  8. [10]

    Byelikov, T

    A. Byelikov, T. Adachi, H. Fujita, K. Fujita, Y . Fu- jita, K. Hatanaka, A. Heger, Y . Kalmykov, K. Kawase, K. Langanke, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 082501 (2007), 5 URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.98.082501

    work page 2007

  9. [11]

    R. G. T. Zegers (Springer Nature Singapore, Singapore, 2023), pp. 739–773, ISBN 978-981-19-6345-2, URL https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-6345-2_77

    work page doi:10.1007/978-981-19-6345-2_77 2023

  10. [12]

    Neutrino Interactions in Hot and Dense Matter

    S. Reddy, M. Prakash, and J. M. Lattimer, Phys. Rev. D 58, 013009 (1998), astro-ph/9710115

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  11. [13]

    The Effects of Correlations on Neutrino Opacities in Nuclear Matter

    A. Burrows and R. F. Sawyer, Phys. Rev. C 58, 554 (1998), astro-ph/9801082

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  12. [15]

    Engel, P

    J. Engel, P . V ogel, and M. R. Zirnbauer, Phys. Rev. C 37, 731 (1988), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevC.37.731

    work page 1988

  13. [16]

    Y .-Z. Qian, W. C. Haxton, K. Langanke, and P . V ogel, Phys. Rev. C 55, 1532 (1997), URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.55.1532

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.55.1532 1997

  14. [17]

    Y . F. Niu, Z. M. Niu, G. Col `o, and E. Vigezzi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 142501 (2015), URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.142501

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.114.142501 2015

  15. [18]

    A. B. Migdal, E. E. Saperstein, M. A. Troitsky, and D. N. V oskresensky, Phys. Rept.192, 179 (1990)

    work page 1990

  16. [19]

    Baym and E

    G. Baym and E. Flowers, Nucl. Phys. A 222, 29 (1974)

    work page 1974

  17. [20]

    L. D. Landau, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 30, 1058 (1956)

    work page 1956

  18. [21]

    Bertsch, D

    G. Bertsch, D. Cha, and H. Toki, Phys. Rev. C 24, 533 (1981), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevC.24.533

    work page 1981

  19. [22]

    Suzuki, Nucl

    T. Suzuki, Nucl. Phys. A 379, 110 (1982)

    work page 1982

  20. [23]

    Nishida and M

    K. Nishida and M. Ichimura, Phys. Rev. C 51, 269 (1995), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevC.51.269

    work page 1995

  21. [24]

    Wakasa, M

    T. Wakasa, M. Ichimura, and H. Sakai, Phys. Rev. C 72, 067303 (2005), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevC.72.067303

    work page 2005

  22. [27]

    Spin-isospin nuclear response using the existing microscopic Skyrme functionals

    S. Fracasso and G. Colo, Phys. Rev. C 76, 044307 (2007), 0704.2892

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  23. [28]

    Fracasso and G

    S. Fracasso and G. Col `o, Phys. Rev. C 72, 064310 (2005), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevC.72.064310

    work page 2005

  24. [29]

    Al-Mamun, A

    M. Al-Mamun, A. W. Steiner, J. N ¨attil¨a, J. Lange, R. O’Shaughnessy, I. Tews, S. Gandolfi, C. Heinke, and S. Han, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 061101 (2021), 2008.12817

    work page arXiv 2021

  25. [30]

    Reddy, M

    S. Reddy, M. Prakash, J. M. Lattimer, and J. A. Pons, Phys. Rev. C 59, 2888 (1999), URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.59.2888

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.59.2888 1999

  26. [31]

    Y .-Z. Ma, Z. Lin, B.-N. Lu, S. Elhatisari, D. Lee, N. Li, U.-G. Meißner, A. W. Steiner, and Q. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 232502 (2024), URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.232502

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.132.232502 2024

  27. [32]

    Z. Lin, A. W. Steiner, and J. Margueron, Phys. Rev. C 107, 015804 (2023), URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.107.015804

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.107.015804 2023

  28. [35]

    Chabanat, P

    E. Chabanat, P . Bonche, P . Haensel, J. Meyer, and R. Schaeffer, Nucl. Phys. A 635, 231 (1998), [Erratum: Nucl.Phys.A 643, 441–441 (1998)]

    work page 1998

  29. [36]

    Kl ¨upfel, P .-G

    P . Kl ¨upfel, P .-G. Reinhard, T. J. B ¨urvenich, and J. A. Maruhn, Phys. Rev. C 79, 034310 (2009), URL https://link. aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.79.034310

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.79.034310 2009

  30. [37]

    B. K. Agrawal, S. Shlomo, and V . K. Au, Phys. Rev. C 72, 014310 (2005), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevC.72.014310

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.72.014310 2005

  31. [39]

    Alex Brown, Phys

    B. Alex Brown, Phys. Rev. C 58, 220 (1998), URL https:// link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.58.220

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.58.220 1998

  32. [40]

    Bartel, P

    J. Bartel, P . Quentin, M. Brack, C. Guet, and H. B. Hakansson, Nucl. Phys. A 386, 79 (1982)

    work page 1982

  33. [41]

    Reinhard, D

    P .-G. Reinhard, D. J. Dean, W. Nazarewicz, J. Dobaczewski, J. A. Maruhn, and M. R. Strayer, Phys. Rev. C 60, 014316 (1999), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevC.60.014316

    work page 1999

  34. [42]

    van Giai and H

    N. van Giai and H. Sagawa, Phys. Lett. B 106, 379 (1981)

    work page 1981

  35. [43]

    L. G. Cao, U. Lombardo, C. W. Shen, and N. V . Giai, Phys. Rev. C 73, 014313 (2006), URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.73.014313

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.73.014313 2006

  36. [44]

    A. W. Steiner, M. Prakash, J. M. Lattimer, and P . J. Ellis, Phys. Rept. 411, 325 (2005), nucl-th/0410066

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  37. [45]

    Rashdan, Modern Physics Letters A 15, 1287 (2000)

    M. Rashdan, Modern Physics Letters A 15, 1287 (2000)

    work page 2000

  38. [46]

    P . A. M. Guichon, H. H. Matevosyan, N. Sandulescu, and A. W. Thomas, Nucl. Phys. A 772, 1 (2006), nucl-th/0603044

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  39. [47]

    Kortelainen, T

    M. Kortelainen, T. Lesinski, J. Mor ´e, W. Nazarewicz, J. Sarich, N. Schunck, M. V . Stoitsov, and S. Wild, Phys. Rev. C 82, 024313 (2010), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevC.82.024313

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.82.024313 2010

  40. [48]

    Unified Analysis of Spin Isospin Responses of Nuclei

    T. Wakasa, M. Ichimura, and H. Sakai, Phys. Rev. C 72, 067303 (2005), nucl-ex/0411055

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  41. [49]

    Wakasa et al., Phys

    T. Wakasa et al., Phys. Rev. C 85, 064606 (2012)

    work page 2012

  42. [50]

    Y asuda, M

    J. Y asuda, M. Sasano, R. G. T. Zegers, H. Baba, D. Bazin, W. Chao, M. Dozono, N. Fukuda, N. In- abe, T. Isobe, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 132501 (2018), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.121.132501

    work page 2018

  43. [51]

    M. Wang, G. Audi, A. H. Wapstra, F. G. Kondev, M. Mac- Cormick, X. Xu, and B. Pfeiffer, Chin. Phys. C 36, 1603 (2012)

    work page 2012

  44. [54]

    Pastore, S

    T. Wakasa, M. Okamoto, M. Dozono, K. Hatanaka, M. Ichimura, S. Kuroita, Y . Maeda, H. Miyasako, T. Noro, T. Saito, et al., Phys. Rev. C 85, 064606 (2012), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC. 85.064606

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc 2012

  45. [55]

    Akimune, I

    H. Akimune, I. Daito, Y . Fujita, M. Fujiwara, M. B. Greenfield, M. N. Harakeh, T. Inomata, J. J¨anecke, K. Katori, S. Nakayama, et al., Phys. Rev. C 52, 604 (1995), URL https://link. aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.52.604

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.52.604 1995

  46. [56]

    Wakasa, H

    T. Wakasa, H. Sakai, H. Okamura, H. Otsu, S. Fujita, S. Ishida, N. Sakamoto, T. Uesaka, Y . Satou, M. B. Greenfield, et al., Phys. Rev. C 55, 2909 (1997), URL https://link.aps. org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.55.2909

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.55.2909 1997

  47. [58]

    Y ako, M

    K. Y ako, M. Sasano, K. Miki, H. Sakai, M. Dozono, D. Frekers, M. B. Greenfield, K. Hatanaka, E. Ihara, M. Kato, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 012503 (2009), URL https://link.aps. org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.012503

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.103.012503 2009

  48. [59]

    T. E. Riley et al., Astrophys. J. Lett. 887, L21 (2019), 1912.05702. 6

    work page arXiv 2019

  49. [60]

    M. C. Miller et al., Astrophys. J. Lett. 887, L24 (2019), 1912.05705

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  50. [61]

    Y . F. Niu, G. Col `o, M. Brenna, P . F. Bortignon, and J. Meng, Phys. Rev. C 85, 034314 (2012), URL https://link. aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.85.034314

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.85.034314 2012

  51. [62]

    BA YESIAN INFERENCE OF THE LANDAU PARAMETERG′ 0 FROM JOINT GAMOW-TELLER MEASUREMENTS

    M. Dutra, O. Lourenc ¸o, J. S. S ´a Martins, A. Delfino, J. R. Stone, and P . D. Stevenson, Phys. Rev. C 85, 035201 (2012), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevC.85.035201. 7 SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL FOR “BA YESIAN INFERENCE OF THE LANDAU PARAMETERG′ 0 FROM JOINT GAMOW-TELLER MEASUREMENTS” A. Definition of Landau parameters We assume we have a spin-is...

    work page 2012

  52. [63]

    the spin-orbit splitting values of 48Ca and 90Zr are strongly correlated; 6) the ground state properties (e.g. binding energy, charge radii) of heavy nuclei are strongly correlated; 7) the ground state properties of light nuclei are strongly correlated; 7) the ground state properties of heavy nuclei are correlated with those of light nuclei, but with less...

    work page

  53. [64]

    a", “b" and “c

    These correlations are subtle and more obvious in simulations with joint GTR constraints. More studies are needed to confirm these correlations. E. Many-body correction on neutrino-nucleon reactions Here, we introduce the basic formulas for calculating the many-body correction on charged current neutrino-nucleon reactions based on RPA. Based on linear resp...

    work page

  54. [65]

    Gamow-Teller strength and the spin-isospin coupling constants of the Skyrme energy functional

    M. Bender, J. Dobaczewski, J. Engel, and W. Nazarewicz, Phys. Rev. C 65, 054322 (2002), nucl-th/0112056

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  55. [66]

    I. S. Towner, Phys. Rept. 155, 263 (1987)

    work page 1987

  56. [67]

    Osterfeld, Rev

    F. Osterfeld, Rev. Mod. Phys. 64, 491 (1992)

    work page 1992

  57. [68]

    Neutrino Capture Reactions on $^{40}$Ar

    T. Suzuki and M. Honma, Phys. Rev. C 87, 014607 (2013), 1211.4078

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  58. [69]

    Spin-orbit and tensor mean-field effects on spin-orbit splitting including self-consistent core polarizations

    M. Zalewski, J. Dobaczewski, W. Satula, and T. R. Werner, Phys. Rev. C 77, 024316 (2008), 0801.0924

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  59. [70]

    M. Wang, G. Audi, A. H. Wapstra, F. G. Kondev, M. MacCormick, X. Xu, and B. Pfeiffer, Chin. Phys. C 36, 1603 (2012)

    work page 2012

  60. [71]

    Angeli and K

    I. Angeli and K. P . Marinova, Atom. Data Nucl. Data Tabl. 99, 69 (2013)

    work page 2013

  61. [72]

    Precision Determination of the Neutral Weak Form Factor of Ca48,

    D. Adhikari et al. (CREX), Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 042501 (2022), 2205.11593

    work page arXiv 2022

  62. [73]

    An Accurate Determina- tion of the Neutron Skin Thickness of 208Pb through Parity-Violation in Electron Scattering,

    D. Adhikari et al. (PREX), Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 172502 (2021), 2102.10767

    work page arXiv 2021

  63. [74]

    E. S. Hernandez, J. Navarro, and A. Polls, Nucl. Phys. A 658, 327 (1999)

    work page 1999

  64. [75]

    Z. Lin, A. W. Steiner, and J. Margueron, Phys. Rev. C 107, 015804 (2023), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevC.107.015804

    work page 2023

  65. [76]

    Effects of spin-orbit interaction on nuclear response and neutrino mean free path

    J. Margueron, J. Navarro, and N. V an Giai, Phys. Rev. C 74, 015805 (2006), nucl-th/0604019

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  66. [77]

    Reddy, M

    S. Reddy, M. Prakash, J. M. Lattimer, and J. A. Pons, Phys. Rev. C 59, 2888 (1999), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevC.59.2888

    work page 1999

  67. [78]

    A new Skyrme interaction with improved spin-isospin properties

    X. Roca-Maza, G. Colo, and H. Sagawa, Phys. Rev. C 86, 031306 (2012), 1205.3958

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  68. [79]

    Suzuki, Nucl

    T. Suzuki, Nucl. Phys. A 379, 110 (1982). 9

    work page 1982