Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 3 cited by

Theory of internal conversion of the thorium-229 nuclear isomer in solid-state hosts

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Internal conversion quenches the 229Th isomer in milliseconds when energetically allowed.

desk verdict A solid, conditional theory of IC quenching in 229Th-doped crystals; the rate formula is honest and useful, but the practical warning hangs on unbenchmarked DFT defect energies. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.15641 v2 pith:AH2YTQI5 submitted 2024-11-23 physics.atom-ph

H. W. T. Morgan , H. B. Tran Tan , R. Elwell , A. N.Alexandrova , Eric R. Hudson , Andrei Derevianko This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.atom-ph PACS 23.20.Nx71.55.-i
keywords thorium-229isomerinternalconversionsolid-statenuclearclockdefectstateshyperfineinteractionprojecteddensityofquenchingfunctionaltheory
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper develops a quantitative theory of internal conversion for the thorium-229 nuclear isomer embedded in solid-state hosts, and argues that whenever the process is energetically allowed, it quenches the isomer on a millisecond timescale — vastly faster than the isomer's measured radiative lifetime of about $10^{3}$ seconds. The mechanism is a resonant transfer of the nuclear excitation energy to a valence-band electron, which is promoted into a thorium 5f defect state through the hyperfine interaction. If the paper is right, the practical consequence for nuclear clock development is immediate: only hosts whose defect states lie safely above or below the resonance window can preserve the long-lived isomeric state needed for clock operation.

What carries the argument

The engine of the argument is the mapping of the nuclear decay to a textbook discrete-state-in-continuum problem: the isomeric nuclear state is coupled by the magnetic-dipole hyperfine interaction to a continuum of particle-hole excitations in which a valence-band electron enters a thorium 5f defect state. Fermi's golden rule then gives the rate as the product of the hyperfine matrix element squared and the thorium 5f-projected density of states at the resonant hole energy. The many-body electronic part is collapsed into a single host-dependent number, $\rho_{5f}(\varepsilon_{\mathrm{hr}})$, while the nuclear and relativistic atomic matrix elements are evaluated ab initio and expressed through the measured $5f_{5/2}$ hyperfine constant, yielding the compact practical formula Eq. (19). Lattice relaxation shifts the defect energy by about 0.5 eV and is absorbed as a $\varepsilon_d \to \varepsilon_d - E_R$ shift, with multi-phonon emission changing the rate only by an order-unity factor.

What would settle it

Compute the defect-state energy of Th:CaF2 with a many-body method that includes particle-hole interactions; if it remains above 8.4 eV, the paper's own resonance condition excludes IC for this host. Alternatively, measure the isomer lifetime as a function of applied strain or doping density: a sharp drop from ~$10^{3}$ s to ~$10^{-3}$ s as the defect level crosses the nuclear transition would confirm the mechanism, while its absence would refute it.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that internal conversion is generically fast in 229Th-doped crystals when two energy conditions are met: the defect state energy $\varepsilon_d$ must not exceed the nuclear transition energy $\omega_{\mathrm{nuc}} \approx 8.4$ eV, and the resulting resonant hole must fall within the valence band. Under these conditions the decay rate is $\Gamma_{\mathrm{IC}} \approx 1.2\times 10^4\, \rho_{5f}(\varepsilon_{\mathrm{hr}})\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$, where $\rho_{5f}$ is the thorium 5f-projected density of states at the resonant hole energy. Using density functional theory for Th:LiSrAlF$_6$ and Th:CaF$_2$, the paper estimates $\rho_{5f}\sim 0.1$ states/eV, yielding $\Gamma_{\mathrm{IC}}\sim 10^3\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$, i.e., a millisecond-scale lifetime. The paper concludes that the ~$10^{3}$ s radiative lifetimes seen in recent experiments therefore imply that the IC channel is closed at the emitting defect sites, and it identifies the 'safe' energy windows for host selection.

Load-bearing premise

The prediction depends entirely on whether the vacancy-like electron level in the crystal actually lies below the nuclear transition energy; if that level is a few electronvolts higher than the calculation says, the rapid quenching never happens.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any host that satisfies the resonance window $\varepsilon_d \le \omega_{\mathrm{nuc}}$ and $\varepsilon_d - \varepsilon_{\mathrm{min}} \ge \omega_{\mathrm{nuc}}$ will quench the isomer in roughly a millisecond, disqualifying it as a nuclear clock medium.
  • The long radiative lifetimes measured in Th:CaF$_2$ and Th:LiSrAlF$_6$ imply that, at the fluorescent doping sites, the IC channel is energetically closed; the paper locates the allowed windows explicitly.
  • The same rate formula accounts for the recently observed photo-quenching of the isomer in LiSrAlF$_6$, with the predicted $10^3\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$ rate matching the experimental extraction of $2\pi\times10^2\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$.
  • Because defect-defect interactions lower defect-state energies, increasing the thorium doping density can open the IC channel, setting a critical doping limit for clock operation.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the defect-state energies computed by cluster-model quantum chemistry (≈11 eV for Th:CaF$_2$) are more accurate than the density-functional values used here, then the practical landscape is less bleak: the default host may already sit in a safe window, and the design question becomes one of keeping defect states above $\omega_{\mathrm{nuc}}$ rather than avoiding them.
  • The rate formula suggests a tunable test: applying strain or an electric field to shift $\varepsilon_d$ across the resonance boundary should produce an abrupt, orders-of-magnitude change in isomer lifetime, providing a clean experimental signature of the mechanism.
  • One could also look for hosts with very small thorium 5f hybridization, since a reduced $\rho_{5f}$ suppresses IC even within the resonance window, adding a second selection axis beyond energy placement.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper develops a quantitative theory of internal conversion (IC) of the 229Th nuclear isomer in solid-state hosts. The isomer is treated as a discrete state embedded in a continuum of particle-hole excitations, coupled through the hyperfine interaction, and the decay rate is obtained from Fermi's golden rule. The rate is reduced to a practical formula, Eq. (19), expressed in terms of the measured 5f5/2 hyperfine constant A5f5/2, a nuclear M1 matrix element extracted from measured lifetimes, and the Th-5f projected density of states at the resonant hole energy. DFT calculations for Th:LiSrAlF6 and Th:CaF2 identify 5f-like defect states and yield an estimated IC rate of order 10^3 s^-1 whenever the resonance conditions (5)-(6) are met. The paper also discusses lattice-relaxation and particle-hole corrections, compares with a recent photo-quenching experiment, and draws conclusions for choosing solid-state hosts for nuclear clock applications.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the paper resolves a genuine controversy in the 229Th solid-state clock literature and provides a concrete, testable design criterion: hosts whose defect-state energies satisfy the resonance window will quench the isomer on millisecond timescales, making them unusable for clocks. The main strengths are the transparent derivation from Fermi's golden rule through the relativistic hyperfine matrix elements, the use of independently measured atomic and nuclear inputs (A5f5/2 and the M1 matrix element), the basis-independence proof in the SI, and the order-of-magnitude agreement with the photo-quenching rate extracted in Ref. [25]. The principal weakness is that the practical applicability of the central result is controlled by DFT-level defect-state energies with no demonstrated error bar, and the paper itself cites a CASPT2 benchmark that would close the IC channel in Th:CaF2. This does not invalidate the rate formula, but it does mean the paper's strongest practical conclusion, 'if energetically allowed, it generally quenches,' is not yet quantitatively supported for currently used hosts.

major comments (3)
  1. [Main text, Eqs. (5)-(6) and Eq. (19); SI 'Effects of particle-hole interaction'] The central rate formula Eq. (19) is nonzero only when the resonance window (5)-(6) is satisfied, making the practical conclusion a binary function of the defect-state energy ε_d. The paper uses PBE/MBJ Kohn-Sham eigenvalues to estimate ε_d for Th:LiSrAlF6 and Th:CaF2 but does not report the numerical values of ε_d, the relaxation shift E_R, or their uncertainties. The cited CASPT2 study (Ref. [23]) gives defect-state energies around 11 eV for Th:CaF2, above ω_nuc ≈ 8.4 eV, which would close the IC channel in that host; a 2-3 eV error in ε_d therefore flips the predicted rate from ~10^3 s^-1 to exactly zero. The SI's own perturbative particle-hole correction is found to have |Δ| ≫ 1, meaning the estimate breaks down, and the subsequent qualitative argument that ρ_5f ~ 0.1 state/eV 'regardless' of particle-hole effects does not repair this. The authors explicitly concede that 'predicting if the IC channel is open critically depends on the reliability of computing the defect state energies ε_d.' I recommend that the paper either provide a benchmarked calculation or a defensible uncertainty range for ε_d in each host, or reformulate the headline claim as a conditional design rule that requires experimental or higher-level verification of ε_d before a host is declared unusable.
  2. [SI 'Lifetimes and the off-diagonal M1 nuclear matrix element', Eqs. (20)-(22)] The value ⟨g‖µ‖e⟩ = (0.84 ± 0.11) μ_N is obtained by a weighted average of the two measured isomer lifetimes with the weight of the CaF2 measurement rescaled by an arbitrarily chosen factor k = 2 ('we pick k = 2'). This ad hoc rescaling is not derived from a statistical model or from a quantified refractive-index uncertainty, and it propagates directly through ξ in Eq. (18) into the prefactor of Eq. (19). The resulting uncertainty in the absolute rate is therefore understated. Please replace the ad hoc prescription with a principled combination of the two measurements (for example, a hierarchical model or a sensitivity scan over k) and show how the final rate changes over a plausible range of k.
  3. [Main text, Eqs. (14)-(15) and Eq. (18)] The numerical prefactor in Eq. (19) uses the isotropic-environment assumption ⟨|c5f5/2|^2⟩/⟨|c5f|^2⟩ = 1/2 in deriving ξ ≈ 11. The hosts LiSrAlF6 and CaF2 are not isotropic, and the DFT-calculated defect wavefunctions shown in Fig. 2 reflect the local crystal environment. The paper does not quantify how much the ratio deviates from 1/2 in the calculated structures. Since this ratio enters Eq. (19) linearly, the quoted prefactor 1.2 × 10^4 carries an unquantified systematic uncertainty that could be larger than the stated statistical uncertainties from A5f5/2 and ⟨g‖µ‖e⟩. Please provide the computed ratio from the DFT wavefunctions, or bound its effect on the final rate estimate.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase 'on a millisecond timescales' should be 'on a millisecond timescale'.
  2. [Eq. (19)] The units 'states/eV s^-1' are ambiguous; they should be written as '(states/eV) s^-1' to make clear that ρ5f carries the states/eV factor.
  3. [Reference list] Reference [10] is the same article as Reference [7]; one of the two entries should be removed or the citation should be deduplicated.
  4. [SI, 'Hyperfine interaction'] In the sentence about 6f, 7f, ... orbitals, 'orbits' should read 'orbitals'.
  5. [Main text, final summary paragraph] The phrase 'The recent experiments [2, 3, 5] relied on observing a nuclear decay on a much longer time-scale' would be clearer with an explicit statement of what 'longer' is relative to (the IC timescale) and with 'timescale' spelled as one word.
  6. [Fig. 1 caption] The caption introduces ε_min but does not define it in the figure itself; please add a short definition or a pointer to the text where ε_min is defined.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the IC-rate derivation combines independent measured and ab initio inputs and is not equivalent to its inputs by construction.

full rationale

The paper's central rate, Eq. (19), is assembled from independent ingredients: the measured free-ion hyperfine constant A5f5/2 (Ref. [22]), relativistic many-body hyperfine matrix elements computed with an atomic-structure code, the nuclear M1 matrix element derived from measured radiative lifetimes, and DFT-computed projected densities of states. None of these inputs is fitted to the solid-state IC rate that is being predicted; the Fermi golden rule expression (7) is a standard perturbation formula, and the phononic and particle-hole corrections are argued from separate DFT and dielectric estimates rather than from the target rate. The comparison with the photo-quenching experiment (Ref. [25]) is a post-hoc benchmark by a partially overlapping group, but it does not enter the derivation, so it is not load-bearing under the hard rules. The paper's own caveat that the resonance condition depends on the reliability of computed defect-state energies is an honest limitation about input accuracy, not a circular reduction of the output to the input. The manuscript therefore contains no self-definitional, fitted-parameter-renamed-as-prediction, or self-citation-driven step.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central rate estimate rests on standard quantum mechanics (golden rule), a two-level M1 nuclear model, and a chain of material-specific inputs: DFT defect energies and 5f PDOS, an approximate relaxation shift, a measured atomic hyperfine constant, and a nuclear M1 element from a weighted lifetime average with an ad hoc weight. The main unquantified risk is the placement of defect energies, which the paper itself flags. No new particles or forces are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • lifetime averaging weight rescaling factor k = 2
    Chosen by hand in the SI ('Lifetimes and the off-diagonal M1 nuclear matrix element') to downweight the LiSrAlF6 lifetime relative to CaF2 when averaging τ = 2319(296) s, giving ⟨g||µ||e⟩ = 0.84(11) µN, which sets the scale of the IC rate.
  • relaxation energy shift ER = ~0.5 eV
    DFT-computed lattice relaxation energy of the Th3+-like defect used to shift defect energies εd → εd - ER. This shift enters the resonance condition and the argument of ρ5f(εhr) = ρ5f(εd - ωnuc - ER). Computed from excited-state DFT, not from the IC rate itself.
  • isotropic averaging ratio ⟨|c5f5/2|^2⟩/⟨|c5f|^2⟩ = 1/2
    Assumes an isotropic environment to set ξ ≈ 11 in Eq. (18). Stated as an estimate; a non-isotropic value would change the prefactor of the rate formula by an order-unity factor.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Fermi's golden rule applies to the discrete-to-continuum transition with the hyperfine interaction as a perturbation.
    Used to derive Eq. (7) from the textbook problem of a discrete state embedded in a continuum. Standard result.
  • domain assumption The nuclear isomer is a two-level system with only the M1 hyperfine channel; higher-rank (E2) couplings only increase the rate.
    Eqs. (2) and (9) use the M1 operator only; the paper states inclusion of E2 would increase the rate and strengthen the conclusions.
  • domain assumption Kohn-Sham DFT orbitals (VASP, PBE+MBJ) provide quantitatively reliable defect state energies and valence-band 5f projected density of states.
    Used to obtain εd, ρ5f, and the relaxation shift ER. The paper itself notes DFT underestimates excited state energies, and cites a CASPT2 study (Ref. [23]) finding εd ~ 11 eV for Th:CaF2, above ωnuc.
  • domain assumption The hole state's partial wave content is dominated by the Th 5f component; p-admixtures contribute at a smaller level.
    Used to reduce the rate to the 5f PDOS in Eq. (13); stated to be ~20% accurate by keeping only the j = 5/2 channel.
  • domain assumption Particle-hole interactions do not change the order of magnitude of the rate despite the failure of the second-order perturbative correction (|Δ| >> 1).
    SI 'Effects of particle-hole interaction': the perturbative correction fails, and a nonperturbative treatment is replaced by a qualitative scattering argument that the integrated PDOS remains ~1, so ρ5f ~ 0.1 state/eV.
  • ad hoc to paper The nuclear M1 matrix element can be extracted from a weighted average of two measured isomer lifetimes, with an ad hoc weight rescaling k = 2.
    SI 'Lifetimes and the off-diagonal M1 nuclear matrix element': the choice of k is not derived from theory or data, only from an assertion that CaF2's index of refraction is better characterized.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Theory of internal conversion of the thorium-229 nuclear isomer in solid-state hosts." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AH2YTQI5

@misc{pith2026241115641,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Theory of internal conversion of the thorium-229 nuclear isomer in solid-state hosts},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AH2YTQI5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.15641}
}
read the original abstract

Laser excitation of thorium-229 nuclei in doped wide bandgap crystals has been demonstrated recently, opening the possibility of developing ultrastable solid-state clocks and sensitive searches for new physics. We develop a quantitative theory of the internal conversion of isomeric thorium-229 in solid-state hosts. The internal conversion of the isomer proceeds by resonantly exciting a valence band electron to a defect state, accompanied by multi-phonon emission. We demonstrate that, if the process is energetically allowed, it generally quenches the isomer on timescales much faster than the isomer's radiative lifetime, despite thorium being in the +4 charge state in the valence band.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.15641 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. During the internal conversion in a crystal, a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a) ThF [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Thorium projected density of states in the valence [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Fluorine projected density of states in the valence [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Thorium projected density of states in the for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Thorium projected density of states in the valence [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Fluorine projected density of states for a F atom in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Photo-Induced Quenching of the 229Th Isomer in a Solid-State Host

    physics.atom-ph 2024-12 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Off-resonant VUV light relaxes the 229Th isomer in LiSrAlF6 with a measured cross-section of about 0.3 megabarn, likely by opening a defect-mediated internal conversion channel.

  2. Resonance nuclear excitation of the $^{229}$Th nucleus via electronic bridge process in Th~II

    physics.atom-ph 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Near-degenerate electron level pairs in Th+ enable a resonant electronic-bridge route to excite the 229Th nuclear isomer and shorten its lifetime, with enhancement factors up to ~10^6.

  3. Using the Th III Ion for a Nuclear Clock and Searches for New Physics

    physics.atom-ph 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Predicted 10,000-fold electronic-bridge enhancement for exciting the 229Th nuclear clock transition in Th III, plus a 1.7-times lifetime reduction and strong new-physics sensitivity factors.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [25]

    Dresselhaus, G

    M. Dresselhaus, G. Dresselhaus, S. B. Cronin, and A. Gomes Souza Filho, in Solid State Properties(Berlin, Heidelberg, 2018) Chap. 20, pp. 411–441

    work page 2018

  2. [23]

    Campbell, A

    C. Campbell, A. Radnaev, and A. Kuzmich, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 223001 (2011)

    work page 2011

  3. [1]

    W. G. Rellergert, D. DeMille, R. R. Greco, M. P. Hehlen, J. R. Torgerson, and E. R. Hudson, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 200802 (2010)

    2010

  4. [2]

    Tiedau, M

    J. Tiedau, M. V. Okhapkin, K. Zhang, J. Thielk- ing, G. Zitzer, E. Peik, F. Schaden, T. Pronebner, I. Morawetz, L. Toscani De Col, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 182501 (2024)

    2024

  5. [3]

    To get an estimate for ⟨g||µ||e⟩, we seek to combine these two values for τ

    on the isomeric state energy of ω ≈ 8.355 eV, their values for the isomeric lifetime, τ = 2510 ± 72 s and τ = 1860 ± 79 s differ significantly. To get an estimate for ⟨g||µ||e⟩, we seek to combine these two values for τ . One may adopt a simple approach for a weighted av- erage and chi-squared-rescaled uncertainty where τ = w1τ1 + w2τ2 w1 + w2 , (20a) χ2 ...

    work page

  6. [4]

    Elwell, C

    R. Elwell, C. Schneider, J. Jeet, J. E. S. Terhune, H. W. T. Morgan, A. N. Alexandrova, H. B. Tran Tan, A. Derevianko, and E. R. Hudson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 013201 (2024)

    2024

  7. [5]

    Zhang, L

    C. Zhang, L. von der Wense, J. F. Doyle, J. S. Higgins, T. Ooi, H. U. Friebel, J. Ye, R. Elwell, J. E. S. Ter- hune, H. W. T. Morgan, A. N. Alexandrova, H. B. Tran Tan, A. Derevianko, and E. R. Hudson, Nature 636, 603 (2024)

    work page 2024

  8. [6]

    Zhang, T

    C. Zhang, T. Ooi, J. S. Higgins, J. F. Doyle, L. von der Wense, K. Beeks, A. Leitner, G. A. Kazakov, P. Li, P. G. Thirolf, T. Schumm, and J. Ye, Nature 633, 63 (2024), arXiv:2406.18719

    arXiv 2024

Show all 37 references
  1. [7]

    F. F. Karpeshin and M. B. Trzhaskovskaya, Phys. Rev. C 76, 1 (2007)

    2007

  2. [8]

    E. V. Tkalya, C. Schneider, J. Jeet, and E. R. Hudson, Phys. Rev. C 92, 054324 (2015)

    2015

  3. [9]

    P. V. Bilous, G. A. Kazakov, I. D. Moore, T. Schumm, and A. P´ alffy, Physical Review A95, 1 (2017)

    2017

  4. [10]

    P. V. Bilous, N. Minkov, and A. P´ alffy, Phys. Rev. C97, 2 (2018)

    2018

  5. [11]

    E. V. Tkalya, C. Schneider, J. Jeet, and E. R. Hudson, Phys. Rev. C 92, 054324 (2015), arXiv:1509.09101

    2015 arXiv

  6. [12]

    S. V. Pineda, P. Chhetri, S. Bara, Y. Elskens, S. Casci, A. N. Alexandrova, M. Au, M. Athanasakis- Kaklamanakis, M. Bartokos, K. Beeks, C. Bernerd, A. Claessens, K. Chrysalidis, T. E. Cocolios, J. G. Cor- reia, H. De Witte, R. Elwell, R. Ferrer, R. Heinke, E. R. Hudson, F. Iva...

    2024 arXiv

  7. [13]

    A. L. Fetter and J. D. Walecka, Quantum Theory of Many-particle Systems (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1971)

    1971

  8. [14]

    Cohen-Tannoudji, B

    C. Cohen-Tannoudji, B. Diu, F. Laloe, and E. Merzbacher, Quantum Mechanics , 3rd ed., Vol. I and II (Wiley, John and Sons, 1998)

    1998

  9. [15]

    Cohen-Tannoudji, J

    C. Cohen-Tannoudji, J. Dupont-Roc, and G. Grynberg, Atom-photon interactions: basic processes and applica- tions (John Wiley & Sons, 1998)

    1998

  10. [16]

    V ASP Software GmbH, Vienna Ab initio Simulation Package (V ASP) (2023)

    2023

  11. [17]

    Andrews, K

    L. Andrews, K. S. Thanthiriwatte, X. Wang, and D. A. Dixon, Inorganic Chemistry 52, 8228 (2013)

    2013

  12. [18]

    Dessovic, P

    P. Dessovic, P. Mohn, R. Jackson, G. Winkler, M. Schre- itl, G. Kazakov, and T. Schumm, Journal of Physics - Condensed Matter 26, 10.1088/0953-8984/26/10/105402 (2014)

    2014 doi

  13. [19]

    H. B. Tran Tan and A. Derevianko, Phys. Rev. A 107, 042809 (2023)

    2023

  14. [20]

    C. J. Campbell, A. G. Radnaev, A. Kuzmich, V. A. Dzuba, V. V. Flambaum, and A. Derevianko, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 120802 (2012)

    2012

  15. [21]

    W. R. Johnson, Atomic Structure Theory: Lectures on Atomic Physics (Springer, New York, NY, 2007)

    2007

  16. [22]

    M. S. Safronova, U. I. Safronova, A. G. Radnaev, C. J. Campbell, and A. Kuzmich, Physical Review A 88, 6 (2013)

    2013

  17. [24]

    Nalikowski, V

    K. Nalikowski, V. Veryazov, K. Beeks, T. Schumm, and M. Kro´ snicki, Phys. Rev. B 111, 115103 (2025), arXiv:2410.00230

    2025 arXiv

  18. [26]

    J. E. S. Terhune, R. Elwell, H. B. T. Tan, U. C. Perera, H. W. T. Morgan, A. N. Alexandrova, A. Derevianko, and E. R. Hudson, , 1 (2024), arXiv:2412.08998

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    G. D. Mahan, Many-Particle Physics, 3rd ed. (Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York, 2000)

    2000

  20. [28]

    Kresse and J

    G. Kresse and J. Furthmuller, Physical Review B 54, 11169 (1996)

    1996

  21. [29]

    P. E. Blochl, Physical Review B 50, 17953 (1994)

    1994

  22. [30]

    Pimon, P

    M. Pimon, P. Mohn, and T. Schumm, Advanced Theory and Simulations 5, 10.1002/adts.202200185 (2022)

    2022 doi

  23. [31]

    J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Physical Re- view Letters 77, 3865 (1996)

    1996

  24. [32]

    Tran and P

    F. Tran and P. Blaha, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 226401 (2009)

    2009

  25. [33]

    A. D. Becke and E. R. Johnson, J. Chem. Phys. 124, 221101 (2006)

    2006

  26. [34]

    D. J. Griffiths and D. F. Schroeter, Introduction to Quan- tum Mechanics, 3rd ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2018)

    2018

  27. [35]

    Woerner, T

    M. Woerner, T. Elsaesser, and W. Kaiser, Physical Re- view B 45, 8378 (1992)

    1992

  28. [36]

    A. M. Dykhne and E. V. Tkalya, JETP Lett. 67, 251 (1998), [Pis’ma Zh. ´Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 67, 233–238 (1998)]

    1998

  29. [37]

    S. G. Porsev and V. V. Flambaum, Phys. Rev. A 81, 032504 (2010)

    2010

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.