Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Testing for isospin symmetry breaking with extensive calculations of isotope shift factors in potassium

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Potassium isotope-shift calculation puts isospin-breaking test at –0.48(63) fm², consistent with zero.

desk verdict Solid RCCSDT isotope-shift factors for K with an honest three-method comparison, but the headline ISB benchmark rests on an assumed mirror-radius relation and a nuclear-polarization calculation deferred to another paper. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.05932 v1 pith:ED5RYPBI submitted 2024-12-08 physics.atom-ph hep-phnucl-exnucl-th

Vaibhav Katyal , A. Chakraborty , B. K. Sahoo , Ben Ohayon , Chien-Yeah Seng , Mikhail Gorchtein , John Behr This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.atom-phhep-phnucl-exnucl-th
keywords isotopeshiftpotassiumrelativisticcoupled-clustertheoryfinite-fieldmethodnuclearchargeradiusisospinsymmetrybreakingsuperallowedbetadecayVud
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 aims to sharpen the extraction of nuclear charge radii for the A = 38 isotriplet (38Ca, 38mK, 38Ar) by calculating isotope-shift factors of potassium with relativistic coupled-cluster theory, and to use these radii as a test of isospin symmetry breaking. The authors argue that the finite-field approach gives the most reliable isotope-shift factors, because it naturally includes orbital relaxation effects. Combining new isotope-shift factors with muonic-atom radii and an updated nuclear-polarization correction, they obtain the isospin-breaking quantity ΔM_B^(1)(38) = −0.48(63) fm², which is compatible with zero. If correct, this is the most stringent charge-radius-based test of isospin symmetry breaking to date and a benchmark for the nuclear-model corrections needed to extract the CKM matrix element Vud from superallowed $\beta$ decays.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the isospin-breaking matrix element ΔM_B^(1) ≈ ½(Z+1 r²_{N,+1} + Z-1 r²_{N,-1}) − Z0 r²_{N,0}, built from charge radii of the isotriplet. The argument also rests on isotope-shift factors F, K_NMS, K_SMS computed with the relativistic coupled-cluster method in singles-doubles-triples approximation, evaluated via finite-field, expectation-value, and analytical-response approaches; the finite-field method is selected because it captures orbital relaxation. The updated nuclear-polarization correction to the muonic reference radius of 39K and the mirror relation r_N(38Ca) = r_N(38Ar) + 0.0727(18) fm carry the final step.

What would settle it

Measure the charge radius of 38Ar directly, via electron scattering on a radioactive 38Ar target or muonic-atom x-ray spectroscopy, and compare the extracted r_N(38Ar) with the mirror-relation prediction; a deviation beyond the quoted 0.0018 fm uncertainty would change ΔM_B^(1)(38) by more than its stated error.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the isospin-symmetry-breaking combination of the A = 38 triplet charge radii, ΔM_B^(1)(38) = −0.48(63) fm², is consistent with zero within uncertainty, and that this constitutes the most stringent test of isospin symmetry breaking using charge radii. The paper also claims that the finite-field method yields isotope-shift factors for potassium that agree with semi-empirical data, and that the previous nuclear-polarization correction to the 39K reference radius was underestimated by about 37 eV due to a previously overlooked nucleon-polarization contribution.

Load-bearing premise

The stringent isospin-breaking test assumes that the mirror charge-radius relation r_N(38Ca) = r_N(38Ar) + 0.0727(18) fm, which comes from a fit to other mirror pairs, holds at A = 38; if the 38Ar radius deviates from this relation, the quoted ΔM_B value is not a direct measurement.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The result provides a rigorous experimental benchmark for nuclear-model calculations of the isospin-breaking correction δC in superallowed beta decays, a crucial input to Vud.
  • The compatibility of ΔM_B^(1)(38) with zero indicates that the charge radii of the A = 38 isotriplet do not show evidence of significant isospin breaking at current precision.
  • The updated r_N(38mK) = 3.4396(37) fm differs by about one standard error from the previously recommended value, affecting the statistical rate function f for 38mK → 38Ar decay.
  • The discrepancy for the A = 26 isotriplet (4.5σ) motivates a reanalysis of the 26mAl charge radius.
  • The improved isotope-shift factors are twice as accurate as previous values for the 38mK–39K radius difference, opening the way for more precise optical measurements.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the mirror relation holds generally, the same method could be applied to other isobaric triplets to map isospin breaking across the nuclear chart.
  • The overlooked nucleon-polarization contribution may shift absolute radii in other medium-mass muonic atoms, not just potassium, suggesting that previously published reference radii in that region could need revision.
  • A direct measurement of the 38Ar charge radius (e.g., electron scattering or a muonic-atom measurement) would remove the dependence on the mirror-fit assumption and convert the stringent test into a model-independent one.
  • The technique of combining finite-field isotope-shift factors with semi-empirical mass shifts could be extended to other alkali atoms with limited stable isotopes.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports relativistic coupled-cluster (RCC) calculations of isotope-shift factors for seven low-lying states of potassium, comparing finite-field, expectation-value, and analytical-response approaches. The finite-field results are selected as the most reliable and are benchmarked against experimental energies, hyperfine constants, muonic radius differences, and semi-empirical mass shifts. Using the recommended field-shift and mass-shift factors, the authors extract the mean-square radius difference between 38mK and 39K, update the absolute radius of 38mK with a revised nuclear-polarization correction, and combine this with an updated 38Ca radius to obtain ΔM_B^(1)(38) = -0.48(63) fm², which they interpret as the most stringent charge-radius-based test of isospin symmetry breaking to date.

Significance. If the central result stands, it provides a valuable experimental benchmark for the isospin-symmetry-breaking corrections needed in superallowed beta-decay studies and for the extraction of V_ud. The paper's strengths include a systematic comparison of three many-body approaches, careful benchmarking against hyperfine and muonic data, explicit treatment of triples, basis, Breit, and QED corrections, and a transparent decomposition of uncertainties. The FF-based mass-shift factors are cross-checked against semi-empirical values, which lends credibility to the atomic theory. However, the headline isospin-breaking test rests on an assumed mirror charge-radius relation for 38Ar and an unpublished nuclear-polarization calculation; these caveats need to be carried explicitly in the abstract and summary, and the sensitivity of the result to those assumptions should be quantified.

major comments (3)
  1. [§VII, Eq. (53)] The stringent test uses r_N(38Ar) not from the direct measurement r(38Ar)=3.402(6) fm quoted from Ref. [29], but from the assumed mirror relation r_N(38Ca)=r_N(38Ar)+0.0727(18) fm, as stated in the sentence 'To perform a more stringent test, we assume that the mirror fit holds in this region of the nuclear chart.' The quoted ΔM_B^(1)(38) = -0.48(63) fm² therefore contains an untested nuclear-model assumption, and the abstract and summary present this as the 'most stringent test' without carrying that caveat. Since this is the paper's central claim, please quantify the sensitivity of ΔM_B to the mirror-relation slope and to plausible local deviations at A=38, and rephrase the abstract and summary to distinguish the direct from the assumption-dependent determination.
  2. [§VI and §VII] The updated absolute radii depend on nuclear-polarization shifts that are asserted but not derived in the manuscript: ΔE_NP(39K)=156(47) eV and ΔE_NP(40Ca)=177 eV, attributed to an additional 'nucleon polarization' effect, with the text stating that details 'will be published elsewhere.' Because these shifts change r_N(39K), r_N(38mK), and r_N(38Ca), the reported radius updates are not reproducible from the information provided. At minimum, include the calculation in an appendix or clearly state which reported quantities are preliminary pending the separate publication. Footnote [75] indicates that ΔM_B itself is only slightly affected because the shift is common to the isotriplet, but the absolute radii are also primary outputs of the paper.
  3. [§V, Table VIII] The semi-empirical total mass-shift factor K_tot_SE is constructed using the measured isotope shifts, the muonic δ⟨r²⟩^{39,41}, and this paper's own F factors from Table IV. The weighted-average K_tot_WA then combines K_tot_SE with K_tot_FF, which share the same atomic wavefunctions and, in particular, the same field-shift factor; the two quantities are therefore not fully independent. Please state the assumed correlation structure and, if the values are simply weighted by their quoted uncertainties, justify that treatment, since it affects the uncertainty on ⟨r²⟩^{38m,39} and hence on r_N(38mK).
minor comments (4)
  1. [Table VI] The header for the field-shift block reads 'F values (in MHz/fm^{-1})'; the units should be MHz/fm^{-2}.
  2. [Eq. (53)] The subscripts Z_{+1}, Z_0, and Z_{-1} should be defined before Eq. (53) is used, or the isospin assignments T3 = ±1, 0 should be stated explicitly.
  3. [Abstract and §IX] The phrase 'most stringent test' should be qualified whenever it is used, since the stringent form of the test relies on the assumed mirror relation for 38Ar.
  4. [§IV B and Table IV] The paper states that second-order contributions in the finite-field method are 'typically considered negligible' and that this assumption might differ for heavier elements; this limitation should be restated in the conclusions or in the uncertainty discussion, as it is worth carrying forward to applications beyond potassium.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the isotope-shift factors are ab initio and externally benchmarked; the stringent ISB test's mirror-fit assumption is a stated extrapolation, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The RCC/FF isotope-shift factors are computed ab initio and benchmarked against measured excitation energies, hyperfine A_hf values, muonic 39,41K radii, and semi-empirical factors. Although the semi-empirical K_tot_SE in Table VIII is formed from measured ISs, the muonic radius difference, and the calculated F, the comparison with K_tot_FF tests the full theory prediction of the isotope shift, and the final extraction of the 38m-39 radius difference uses measured 38m IS data rather than fitting the target radius. The updated r_N(38mK) and r_N(38Ca) are built from independent muonic/electron-scattering references and measured differential radii. The central ISB result uses Eq. (53), a definitional combination of charge radii, and the more stringent version explicitly assumes the Ref. [29] mirror fit, stated in Section VII: 'To perform a more stringent test, we assume that the mirror fit holds in this region of the nuclear chart.' This is a transparent empirical extrapolation from other mirror pairs, not a quantity defined in terms of the target result, so it is a correctness caveat rather than circularity. Self-citations (Refs. [16,17,29]) are present, but the key atomic and radius results are externally benchmarked and parameter-free, so they do not carry the derivation by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are introduced. The 'nucleon polarization' effect is a standard hadronic contribution, not a new entity. The free parameters listed are numerical choices or externally supplied numbers that the conclusions depend on, not fitted atomic parameters.

free parameters (5)
  • Finite-field step lambda_o = 10^-5 a.u.
    Numerical differentiation step chosen uniformly for all states for practical reasons; state-dependent optimal values were not used and lambda-dependence was not systematically reported.
  • Nuclear polarization shift DeltaE_NP(39K) = 156(47) eV
    Used to revise r_N(39K) from 3.4353(29) fm to 3.4367(31) fm; the derivation is not included in this manuscript.
  • Nuclear polarization shift DeltaE_NP(40Ca) = 177 eV
    Used for the updated r_N(40Ca)=3.4818(30) fm in the 38Ca radius channel; calculation details are deferred to a separate publication.
  • Mirror-fit slope for A=38 radii = 1.382(34) fm per unit I; r_N(38Ca)-r_N(38Ar)=0.0727(18) fm
    Empirical relation from Ref. [29] used to substitute for the poorly measured 38Ar radius in the DeltaM_B test.
  • SMS uncertainty inflation factor = 1/3 of |RCCSD - RCCSDT|
    Ad hoc uncertainty recipe stated in Section IV B for specific mass shift factors; changing this factor changes the quoted radii uncertainties.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The first-order isotope shift formula of Eq. (1) neglects second- and higher-order shifts.
    Assumed valid for K; second-order contributions are discussed as small but not computed systematically.
  • domain assumption Residual spin-orbit effects are neglected in the DeltaM_B expression of Eq. (53).
    The paper states this approximation is due only to residual spin-orbit effects, citing Ref. [16].
  • domain assumption The mirror charge-radius relation from Ref. [29] holds for the A=38 isotriplet.
    Used to replace the poorly measured 38Ar radius by r_N(38Ca)-0.0727(18) fm in the DeltaM_B test.
  • ad hoc to paper The updated nuclear polarization calculation including nucleon polarization is correct.
    No details are provided in this manuscript; a separate publication is promised in Section VI.
  • standard math The Dirac-Coulomb Hamiltonian with Breit and model-potential QED corrections is an adequate atomic theory for deriving IS factors.
    This is the standard framework used throughout the paper; QED contributions are treated as uncertainties.
  • domain assumption The Fermi nuclear charge distribution is adequate and model dependence is negligible.
    Checked with four charge-distribution models in Table VII; differences are smaller than other uncertainties.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Testing for isospin symmetry breaking with extensive calculations of isotope shift factors in potassium." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ED5RYPBI

@misc{pith2026241205932,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Testing for isospin symmetry breaking with extensive calculations of isotope shift factors in potassium},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ED5RYPBI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.05932}
}
abstract

Precise evaluation of the isotope shift (IS) factors for seven low-lying potassium (K) states is achieved using relativistic coupled-cluster (RCC) theory. The energies of these states are assessed and compared with experimental data to confirm the accuracy of the wave functions calculated at varying RCC theory approximations and highlight the significance of many-body and relativistic effects in determining the energies and IS factors of K. Various methods are used to compute the IS factors, with the finite-field (FF) approach yielding results that align with observed and semi-empirical data. This consistency is attributed to orbital relaxation effects that are naturally present in the FF method but emerge only through complex interactions in other techniques. Using the IS factors derived from FF, we review the mean square radius difference between $^{38m}$K and $^{39}$K. From this difference and muonic atom x-ray spectroscopy, we deduce the absolute radius of $^{38m}$K using an updated calculation of the nuclear polarizability effect. Finally, we evaluate the isospin symmetry breaking (ISB) in this isotriplet by integrating the radius of $^{38m}$K with an updated radius of $^{38}$Ca, concluding that the ISB is compatible with zero. This finding offers a stringent benchmark for nuclear model calculations of ISB corrections in nuclear beta decay, which play a key role in determining the $V_{ud}$ matrix element.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Ab initio Calculations of Electric Dipole Polarizabilities in the Li, Na and K Atoms

    physics.atom-ph 2025-02 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Relativistic coupled-cluster linear-response calculations produce recommended static dipole scalar and tensor polarizabilities for six low-lying states of Li, Na, and K.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

90 extracted references · 77 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [29]

    J. C. Berengut, V. A. Dzuba, and V. V. Flambaum, Isotope-shift calculations for atoms with one valence elec - tron, Phys. Rev. A 68, 022502 (2003)

    work page 2003

  2. [75]

    Satuła, P

    W. Satuła, P. Bączyk, J. Dobaczewski, and M. Konieczka, No-core configuration-interaction model for the isospin- and angular-momentum-projected states, Phys. Rev. C 94, 024306 (2016)

    work page 2016

  3. [1]

    nucleon polarization

    This method is referred to as a Calibrated King plot. However, independent abso- lute charge radii measurements have only been achieved with the two stable K isotopes [ 50], while the radii of at least three isotopes are needed for a calibrated King plot. In light of this, we adopt a different method, whose results are given in Table VIII. It relies on ⟨r2...

  4. [2]

    Developing a many- body approach begins with establishing a mean-field wave function, which is formed through the DHF method

    Employed methods The methods described above for calculating the IS factors can be implemented with varying degrees of ap- proximation in many-body methods. Developing a many- body approach begins with establishing a mean-field wave function, which is formed through the DHF method. In this study, IS factors derived from DHF wave functions are referred to a...

  5. [3]

    King, Isotope Shifts in Atomic Spectra (Springer Sci- ence & Business Media, 2013)

    W. King, Isotope Shifts in Atomic Spectra (Springer Sci- ence & Business Media, 2013)

    2013

  6. [4]

    X. F. Yang, S. J. Wang, S. G. Wilkins, and R. F. G. Ruiz, Laser spectroscopy for the study of exotic nuclei, Prog. Part. Nuc. Phys. 129, 104005 (2023)

    2023

  7. [5]

    Blaum, M

    K. Blaum, M. Block, R. B. Cakirli, S. Eliseev, M. Kowalska, S. Kreim, Y. A. Litvinov, S. Nagy, W. Nörtershäuser, and D. T. Yordanov, Measure- ments of ground-state properties for nuclear struc- ture studies by precision mass and laser spectroscopy, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 312, 092001 (2011)

    2011

  8. [6]

    Blaum, J

    K. Blaum, J. Dilling, and W. Nörtershäuser, Precision atomic physics techniques for nuclear physics with ra- dioactive beams, Phys. Scr. 2013, 014017 (2013)

    2013

Show all 90 references
  1. [7]

    Knecht, A

    A. Knecht, A. Skawran, and S. M. Vogiatzi, Study of nuclear properties with muonic atoms, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 135, 777 (2020)

    2020

  2. [8]

    Antognini, S

    A. Antognini, S. Bacca, A. Fleischmann, L. Gastaldo, F. Hagelstein, P. Indelicato, A. Knecht, V. Lensky, B. Ohayon, V. Pascalutsa, et al. , Muonic-atom spec- troscopy and impact on nuclear structure and precision QED theory, (2022), arXiv:2210.16929

    2022 arXiv

  3. [9]

    C. S. Wu and L. Wilets, Muonic atoms and nuclear struc- ture, Ann. Rev. Nuc. Part. Sci. 19, 527 (1969)

    1969

  4. [10]

    Engfer, H

    R. Engfer, H. Schneuwly, J. Vuilleumier, H. Wal- ter, and A. Zehnder, Charge-distribution param- eters, isotope shifts, isomer shifts, and mag- netic hyperfine constants from muonic atoms, At. Data Nuc. Data Tab. 14, 509 (1974)

    1974

  5. [11]

    J. C. Hardy and I. S. Towner, Superallowed 0+ → 0+ nuclear β decays: 2020 critical sur- vey, with implications for V ud and CKM unitarity, Phys. Rev. C 102, 045501 (2020)

    2020

  6. [12]

    Cirigliano, A

    V. Cirigliano, A. Crivellin, M. Hoferichter, and M. Moulson, Scrutinizing CKM unitarity with a new measurement of the K µ 3/Kµ 2 branching fraction, Phys. Lett. B 838, 137748 (2023)

    2023

  7. [13]

    Cabibbo, Unitary symmetry and leptonic decays, Phys

    N. Cabibbo, Unitary symmetry and leptonic decays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 10, 531 (1963)

    1963

  8. [14]

    Kobayashi and T

    M. Kobayashi and T. Maskawa, CP-violation in the renormalizable theory of weak interaction, Prog. Theor. Phys. 49, 652 (1973)

    1973

  9. [15]

    Seng and M

    C.-Y. Seng and M. Gorchtein, Data-driven reeval- uation of f t values in superallowed β decays, Phys. Rev. C 109, 045501 (2024)

    2024

  10. [16]

    C. Y. Seng and M. Gorchtein, Electroweak nuclear radii constrain the isospin breaking correction to V ud, Phys. Lett. B 838, 137654 (2023)

    2023

  11. [17]

    Gorchtein and C

    M. Gorchtein and C. Y. Seng, Superallowed nuclear beta decays and precision tests of the standard model, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 74, 23 (2024)

    2024

  12. [18]

    to all-orders

    for the FS and NMS factors yields ⟨oFS/NMS⟩ = ⟨φ(0) v |oFS/NMS|φ(0) v ⟩ + ⟨φ(0) v |h0|φ(1) v ⟩ + Nc∑ a=1 [ ⟨φ(0) v φ(0) a |g|φ(1) v φ(0) a ⟩ − ⟨φ(0) v φ(0) a |g|φ(0) a φ(1) v ⟩ ] + Nc∑ a=1 [ ⟨φ(0) v φ(0) a |g|φ(0) v φ(1) a ⟩ − ⟨φ(0) i φ(0) a |g|φ(1) a φ(0) v ⟩ ] . (35) For the...

  13. [19]

    C. Y. Seng, Model-independent determination of nuclear weak form factors and implications for standard model precision tests, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 152501 (2023)

    2023

  14. [20]

    Cheal, T

    B. Cheal, T. E. Cocolios, and S. Fritzsche, Laser spectroscopy of radioactive isotopes: Role and limitations of accurate isotope-shift calculations, Phys. Rev. A 86, 042501 (2012)

    2012

  15. [21]

    C. Y. Seng and M. Gorchtein, Toward ab- initio nuclear theory calculations of δc, Phys. Rev. C 109, 044302 (2024)

    2024

  16. [22]

    Plattner, E

    P. Plattner, E. Wood, L. Al Ayoubi, O. Beliuskina, M. L. Bissell, K. Blaum, P. Campbell, B. Cheal, R. P. de Groote, C. S. Devlin, T. Eronen, L. Filippin, R. F. 19 Garcia Ruiz, Z. Ge, S. Geldhof, W. Gins, M. Gode- froid, H. Heylen, M. Hukkanen, P. Imgram, A. Jaries, A. Jokinen,...

    2023

  17. [23]

    B. K. Sahoo, S. Blundell, A. V. Oleynichenko, R. F. G. Ruiz, L. V. Skripnikov, and B. Ohayon, Recent advance- ments in atomic many-body methods for high-precision studies of isotope shifts, Topical Review submitted to J. Phys. B (2024), arXiv:2408.09959

    2024 arXiv

  18. [24]

    M. S. Safronova and W. R. Johnson, Reanalysis of the iso- tope shift and nuclear charge radii in radioactive potas- sium isotopes, Phys. Rev. A 64, 052501 (2001)

    2001

  19. [25]

    R. D. Ehrlich, D. Fryberger, D. A. Jensen, C. Nissim- Sabat, R. J. Powers, V. L. Telegdi, and C. K. Hargrove, Precise measurements of muonic isotope shifts for 29 nu- clides, in particular, for the Ca isotopes 40, 42, 44, and 48, Phys. Rev. Lett. 18, 959 (1967)

    1967

  20. [26]

    Martensson and S

    A.-M. Martensson and S. Salomonson, Specific mass shifts in Li and K calculated using many-body perturba- tion theory, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Phys. 15, 2115 (1982)

    1982

  21. [27]

    A. M. Martensson-Pendrill, L. Pendrill, A. Sa- lomonson, A. Ynnerman, and H. Warston, Reanalysis of the isotope shift and nuclear charge radii in radioactive potassium isotopes, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys 23, 1749 (1990)

    1990

  22. [28]

    Koszorus, X

    A. Koszorus, X. F. Yang, W. G. Jiang, et al., Charge radii of exotic potassium isotopes challenge nuclear theory and the magic character of N =32, Nat. Phys. 17, 439 (2021)

    2021

  23. [30]

    V. A. Dzuba, W. R. Johnson, and M. S. Safronova, Calculation of isotope shifts for cesium and francium, Phys. Rev. A 72, 022503 (2005)

    2005

  24. [31]

    Roy and S

    S. Roy and S. Majumder, Ab initio estimations of the isotope shift for the first three elements of the K isoelec- tronic sequence, Phys. Rev. A 92, 012508 (2015)

    2015

  25. [32]

    Schwartz, Theory of hyperfine structure, Phys

    C. Schwartz, Theory of hyperfine structure, Phys. Rev. 97, 380 (1955)

    1955

  26. [33]

    Ohayon, Radii of mirror nuclei and isobaric triplets, (2024), arXiv:2409.08193

    B. Ohayon, Radii of mirror nuclei and isobaric triplets, (2024), arXiv:2409.08193

    2024 arXiv

  27. [34]

    Bohr, The difference between series spectra of iso- topes, Nature 109, 746 (1922)

    N. Bohr, The difference between series spectra of iso- topes, Nature 109, 746 (1922)

    1922

  28. [35]

    Ehrenfest, The difference between series spectra of iso- topes, Nature 109, 745 (1922)

    P. Ehrenfest, The difference between series spectra of iso- topes, Nature 109, 745 (1922)

    1922

  29. [36]

    J. S. M. Ginges and J. C. Berengut, Phys. Rev. A 93, 052509 (2016)

    2016

  30. [37]

    A. N. Artemyev, V. M. Shabaev, and V. A. Yerokhin, Nuclear recoil corrections to the 2p3/ 2 state energy of hydrogen-like and high- Z lithium-like atoms in all orders in alpha Z, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 28, 5201 (1995)

    1995

  31. [38]

    Jönsson and C

    P. Jönsson and C. F. Fischer, SMS92: a pro- gram for relativistic isotope shift calculations, Comput. Phys. Comm. 100, 81 (1997)

    1997

  32. [39]

    B. K. Sahoo, Conforming the measured life- times of the 5d 2D3/ 2, 5/ 2 states in Cs with theory, Phys. Rev. A 93, 022503 (2016)

    2016

  33. [40]

    B. K. Sahoo and B. Ohayon, Benchmarking many-body approaches for the determination of isotope-shift con- stants: Application to the Li, Be +, and Ar 15+ isoelec- tronic systems, Phys. Rev. A 103, 052802 (2021)

    2021

  34. [41]

    Lindgren and J

    I. Lindgren and J. Morrison, Atomic Many-Body Theory , edited by G. Ecker, P. Lambropoulos, and H. Walther (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1985)

    1985

  35. [42]

    B. K. Sahoo, S. Majumder, R. K. Chaudhuri, B. P. Das, and D. Mukherjee, Ab initio determination of the lifetime of the 6 2P3/ 2 state for 207Pb+ by relativistic many-body theory, J. Phys. B 37, 3409 (2004)

    2004

  36. [43]

    B. K. Sahoo, A. R. Vernon, R. F. G. Ruiz, C. L. Bin- nersley, J. Billowes, M. L. Bissell, T. E. Cocolios, G. J. Farooq-Smith, K. T. Flanagan, W. Gins, R. P. de Groote, A. Koszorus, G. Neyens, K. M. Lynch, F. Parnefjord- Gustafsson, C. M. Ricketts, K. D. A. Wendt, S. G. Wilkins...

    2020

  37. [44]

    U. I. Safronova and M. S. Safronova, High-accuracy cal- culation of energies, lifetimes, hyperfine constants, mul- tipole polarizabilities, and blackbody radiation shift in 39K, Phys. Rev. A 78, 052504 (2008)

    2008

  38. [46]

    Kramida, Yu

    A. Kramida, Yu. Ralchenko, J. Reader, and and NIST ASD Team, NIST Atomic Spectra Database (ver. 5.12), [Online]. A vailable: https://physics.nist.gov/asd. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD (2024)

    2024

  39. [47]

    Eliav, U

    E. Eliav, U. Kaldor, and Y. Ishikawa, Ionization po- tentials and excitation energies of the alkali-metal atoms by the relativistic coupled-cluster method, Phys. Rev. A 50, 1121 (1994)

    1994

  40. [48]

    Allegrini, E

    M. Allegrini, E. Arimondo, and L. A. Orozco, Survey of hyperfine structure measurements in alkali atoms, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 51, 043102 (2022)

    2022

  41. [49]

    Y. A. Demidov, M. G. Kozlov, A. E. Barzakh, and V. A. Yerokhin, Bohr-weisskopf effect in the potassium iso- topes, Phys. Rev. C 107, 024307 (2023)

    2023

  42. [50]

    Ohayon, R

    B. Ohayon, R. F. G. Ruiz, Z. H. Sun, G. Hagen, T. Pa- penbrock, and B. K. Sahoo, Nuclear charge radii of na isotopes: Interplay of atomic and nuclear theory, Phys. Rev. C 105, L031305 (2022)

    2022

  43. [51]

    Arimondo, M

    E. Arimondo, M. Inguscio, and P. Violino, Experimental determinations of the hyperfine structure in the alkali atoms, Rev. Mod. Phys. 49, 31 (1977)

    1977

  44. [52]

    Bendali, H

    N. Bendali, H. T. Duong, and J. L. Vialle, High- resolution laser spectroscopy on the D 1 and D 2 lines of 39, 40, 41K using RF modulated laser light, J. Phys. B: Atom. Mol. Phys. 14, 4231 (1981)

    1981

  45. [53]

    Nuclear Theory for New Physics

    is due only to neglecting the residual spin-orbit effects. Plugging in the values for the 38Ca, 38mK and 38Ar radii to Eq. ( 53) results in a value consistent with zero, but with too large of an uncertainty to test isospin sym- metry breaking. This may be traced back to the mis...

    2023

  46. [54]

    J. C. Berengut, D. Budker, C. Delaunay, V. V. Flambaum, C. Frugiuele, E. Fuchs, C. Grojean, R. Harnik, R. Ozeri, G. Perez, and Y. Soreq, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 091801 (2018)

    2018

  47. [55]

    H. D. Wohlfahrt, E. B. Shera, M. V. Hoehn, Y. Ya- mazaki, and R. M. Steffen, Nuclear charge distributions in 11f 7/ 2-shell nuclei from muonic x-ray measurements, 20 Phy. Rev. C 23, 533 (1981)

    1981

  48. [56]

    Ohayon, J

    B. Ohayon, J. E. Padilla-Castillo, S. C. Wright, G. Meijer, and B. K. Sahoo, Reconciling mean- squared radius differences in the silver chain through improved measurement and ab initio calculations, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 033040 (2024)

    2024

  49. [57]

    Falke, E

    S. Falke, E. Tiemann, C. Lisdat, H. Schnatz, and G. Grosche, Transition frequencies of the D lines of 39K, 40K and 41K measured with a femtosecond laser fre- quency comb, Phys. Rev. A 74, 032503 (2006)

    2006

  50. [58]

    Halloran, S

    L. Halloran, S. Fostner, E. Paradis, and J. Behr, Specific mass shift of potassium 5P 1/ 2 state, Opt. Comm. 282, 554 (2009)

    2009

  51. [59]

    Behrle, M

    A. Behrle, M. Koschorreck, and M. Köhl, Isotope shift and hyperfine splitting of the 4s → 5p transition in potas- sium, Phys. Rev. A 83, 052507 (2011)

    2011

  52. [60]

    P. V. K. Kumar and M. V. Suryanarayana, Isotope shift and hyperfine structure measurements of 4s 2S1/ 2 → 6s 2S1/ 2 two-photon transition of potassium isotopes, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 44, 055003 (2011)

    2011

  53. [61]

    J. A. Behr, A. Gorelov, T. Swanson, O. Häusser, K. P. Jackson, M. Trinczek, U. Giesen, J. M. D’Auria, R. Hardy, T. Wilson, P. Choboter, F. Leblond, L. Buch- mann, M. Dombsky, C. D. P. Levy, G. Roy, B. A. Brown, and J. Dilling, Magneto-optic Trapping of β - Decaying 38Km, 37K f...

    1997

  54. [62]

    M. L. Bissell, J. Papuga, H. Naïdja, K. Kreim, K. Blaum, M. De Rydt, R. F. Garcia Ruiz, H. Heylen, M. Kowalska, R. Neugart, G. Neyens, W. Nörtershäuser, F. Nowacki, M. M. Rajabali, R. Sanchez, K. Sieja, and D. T. Yor- danov, Proton-neutron pairing correlations in the self- con...

    2014

  55. [63]

    Touchard, P

    F. Touchard, P. Guimbal, S. Büttgenbach, R. Klapisch, M. De Saint Simon, J. Serre, C. Thibault, H. Duong, P. Juncar, S. Liberman, J. Pinard, and J. Vialle, Isotope shifts and hyperfine structure of 38− 47K by laser spec- troscopy, Phys. Lett. B 108, 169 (1982)

    1982

  56. [64]

    Koszorús, X

    A. Koszorús, X. F. Yang, J. Billowes, C. L. Binners- ley, M. L. Bissell, T. E. Cocolios, G. J. Farooq-Smith, R. P. de Groote, K. T. Flanagan, S. Franchoo, R. F. Garcia Ruiz, S. Geldhof, W. Gins, A. Kanellakopou- los, K. M. Lynch, G. Neyens, H. H. Stroke, A. R. Ver- non, K. D. ...

    2019

  57. [65]

    B. B. P. Sinha, G. A. Peterson, R. R. Whit- ney, I. Sick, and J. S. McCarthy, Nuclear charge distributions of isotone pairs. ii. 39K and 40Ca, Phys. Rev. C 7, 1930 (1973)

    1973

  58. [66]

    Fricke and K

    G. Fricke and K. Heilig, Nuclear Charge Radii , edited by H. Schopper, Vol. 454 (Springer-Verlag Berlin Hei- delberg, 2004)

    2004

  59. [67]

    Pachucki, V

    K. Pachucki, V. Lensky, F. Hagelstein, S. S. Li Muli, S. Bacca, and R. Pohl, Comprehensive theory of the lamb shift in light muonic atoms, Rev. Mod. Phys. 96, 015001 (2024)

    2024

  60. [68]

    I. S. Towner and J. C. Hardy, Calculated correc- tions to superallowed fermi β decay: New eval- uation of the nuclear-structure-dependent terms, Phys. Rev. C 66, 035501 (2002)

    2002

  61. [69]

    I. S. Towner and J. C. Hardy, Improved calculation of the isospin-symmetry-breaking corrections to superallowed fermi β decay, Phys. Rev. C 77, 025501 (2008)

    2008

  62. [70]

    J. C. Hardy and I. S. Towner, Superallowed nuclear de- cays: A new survey with precision tests of the con- served vector current hypothesis and the standard model, Phys. Rev. C 79, 055502 (2009)

    2009

  63. [71]

    Xayavong and N

    L. Xayavong and N. A. Smirnova, Radial overlap cor- rection to superallowed 0+ → 0+ β decay reexamined, Phys. Rev. C 97, 024324 (2018)

    2018

  64. [72]

    W. E. Ormand and B. A. Brown, Corrections to the fermi matrix element for superallowed β decay, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 866 (1989)

    1989

  65. [73]

    W. E. Ormand and B. A. Brown, Isospin- mixing corrections for f p-shell fermi transitions, Phys. Rev. C 52, 2455 (1995)

    1995

  66. [74]

    Satula, J

    W. Satula, J. Dobaczewski, W. Nazarewicz, and M. Rafalski, Microscopic calculations of isospin- breaking corrections to superallowed beta decay, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 132502 (2011)

    2011

  67. [76]

    Liang, N

    H. Liang, N. Van Giai, and J. Meng, Isospin correc- tions for superallowed fermi β decay in self-consistent relativistic random-phase approximation approaches, Phys. Rev. C 79, 064316 (2009)

    2009

  68. [77]

    Auerbach, Coulomb corrections to superallowed β de- cay in nuclei, Phys

    N. Auerbach, Coulomb corrections to superallowed β de- cay in nuclei, Phys. Rev. C 79, 035502 (2009)

    2009

  69. [78]

    A. J. Miller, K. Minamisono, A. Klose, D. Garand, C. Kujawa, J. D. Lantis, Y. Liu, B. Mass, P. F. Man- tica, W. Nazarewicz, W. Nörtershäuser, S. V. Pineda, P. G. Reinhard, D. M. Rossi, F. Sommer, C. Sum- ithrarachchi, A. Teigelhöfer, and J. Watkins, Proton su- perfluidity and c...

    2019

  70. [79]

    Note that at the current precision level ∆ M (1) B (A = 38) is only slightly affected by the updated ∆ ENP since the shift has the same sign and nearly identical size for all members of the isotriplet

  71. [80]

    J. L. Friar and J. W. Negele, Theoretical and ex- perimental determination of nuclear charge distribu- tions, in Advances in Nuclear Physics: Volume 8 , edited by M. Baranger and E. Vogt (Springer US, Boston, MA,

  72. [81]

    Reinhard and W

    P.-G. Reinhard and W. Nazarewicz, Nuclear charge densities in spherical and deformed nu- clei: Toward precise calculations of charge radii, Phys. Rev. C 103, 054310 (2021)

    2021

  73. [82]

    Adamczak, A

    A. Adamczak, A. Antognini, N. Berger, T. E. Co- colios, N. Deokar, C. E. Düllmann, A. Eggenberger, R. Eichler, M. Heines, H. Hess, et al. , Muonic atom spectroscopy with microgram target material, Eur. Phys. J. A 59, 15 (2023)

    2023

  74. [83]

    Heines, L

    M. Heines, L. Antwis, S. Bara, B. Caerts, T. E. Cocolios, S. Eisenwinder, J. Fletcher, T. Kieck, A. Knecht, M. Niikura, N. Ritjoho, L. M. Pereira, R. Pohl, A. Vantomme, S. M. Vogiatzi, K. von Schoeler, F. Wauters, R. Webb, Q. Zhao, and S. Zwei- 21 dler, Muonic x-ray spectrosco...

    2023

  75. [84]

    Antwis, S

    L. Antwis, S. Bara, C. Bruhn, T. E. Cocol- ios, M. Deseyn, A. Doinaki, C. E. Düllmann, J. Fletcher, M. Heines, R. Heller, et al. , A com- parative study of target fabrication strategiesfor mi- crogram muonic atom spectroscopy, Research Square https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4...

    2024 doi

  76. [85]

    Tsukada, A

    K. Tsukada, A. Enokizono, T. Ohnishi, K. Adachi, T. Fu- jita, M. Hara, M. Hori, T. Hori, S. Ichikawa, K. Ku- rita, K. Matsuda, T. Suda, T. Tamae, M. Togasaki, M. Wakasugi, M. Watanabe, and K. Yamada, First elas- tic electron scattering from 132Xe at the SCRIT facility, Phys. R...

    2017

  77. [86]

    J. E. Stalnaker, H. M. G. Ayer, J. H. Baron, A. Nuñez, and M. E. Rowan, Measurement of the 4S 1/ 2 → 6P1/ 2 transition frequency in atomic potassium via direct frequency-comb spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. A 96, 012504 (2017)

    2017

  78. [87]

    J. Z. Han, C. Pan, K. Y. Zhang, X. F. Yang, S. Q. Zhang, J. C. Berengut, S. Goriely, H. Wang, Y. M. Yu, J. Meng, J. W. Zhang, and L. J. Wang, Isotope shift factors for the cd + 5s 2S1/ 2 → 5p 2P3/ 2 tran- sition and determination of cd nuclear charge radii, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, ...

    2022

  79. [88]

    B. K. Sahoo and B. Ohayon, All-optical differential radii in zinc, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 043142 (2023)

    2023

  80. [89]

    Ohayon, H

    B. Ohayon, H. Rahangdale, E. Parnes, G. Perelman, O. Heber, and G. Ron, Decay microscope for trapped neon isotopes, Phys. Rev. C 101, 035501 (2020)

    2020

  81. [90]

    Gu and J

    S. Gu and J. A. Behr, Off-Raman resonance effects on hyperfine coherences, Phys. Rev. A 68, 015804 (2003)

    2003

  82. [91]

    Fenker, J

    B. Fenker, J. A. Behr, D. Melconian, R. M. A. An- derson, M. Anholm, D. Ashery, R. S. Behling, I. Co- hen, I. Craiciu, J. M. Donohue, C. Farfan, D. Friesen, A. Gorelov, J. McNeil, M. Mehlman, H. Norton, K. Olchanski, S. Smale, A. N. V. O. Thériault, and C. L. Warner., Precisio...

    2016

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.