Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 103 references

Strontium I, III, IV and V: Electron Impact Excitation Data for Kilonovae and White Dwarf Diagnostic Applications

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper delivers the first Maxwellian-averaged electron-impact excitation data for Sr I, III, IV, and V, and identifies a Sr V line at 1203.35 nm as a candidate kilonova ionisation diagnostic.

desk verdict Useful new R-matrix effective collision strengths for Sr I, III, IV and V, but the 1203.35 nm kilonova diagnostic claim leans on inter-ion PEC comparisons the paper itself says are not physical, so that inference should be recast. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.09788 v1 pith:KZUEKP4L submitted 2025-05-14 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.HEphysics.atom-phphysics.chem-phphysics.comp-ph

David J. Dougan , Niall E. McElroy , Connor P. Ballance , Catherine A. Ramsbottom This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.HEphysics.atom-phphysics.chem-phphysics.comp-ph
keywords atomicdataelectron-impactexcitationeffectivecollisionstrengthsstrontiumkilonovaewhitedwarfsR-matrixmethodnon-LTEmodelling
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

Strontium lines show up in kilonova spectra and in the atmospheres of hot white dwarfs, but modelling those lines under non-LTE conditions requires electron-impact excitation rates that simply did not exist for most strontium ions. This paper fills that gap for four species: neutral Sr and the doubly, triply, and quadruply ionised stages Sr III, Sr IV, and Sr V. The authors build new target structures, check their energies and Einstein A-values against laboratory data and earlier calculations, and then compute R-matrix collision strengths, Maxwellian-averaged into effective collision strengths. When those data are fed into a collisional-radiative solver, a Sr V forbidden line at 1203.35 nm stands out as strong and density-sensitive within kilonova conditions, making it a plausible benchmark for how far strontium ionisation can go in a neutron-star merger. The paper also reports that most other potential diagnostic ratios across these ion stages fail, because the levels sit in either coronal or local-thermal-equilibrium conditions.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the close-coupling R-matrix method for electron-impact excitation, in two implementations: the semi-relativistic Breit-Pauli package RMBP for Sr I and Sr IV, and the fully relativistic Dirac R-matrix package DARC for Sr III and Sr V. The output is the dimensionless collision strength $\Omega_{i\to j}$, which is then converted to the Maxwellian-averaged effective collision strength $$\Upsilon_{i\to j}(T_e) = \int_0^\infty \Omega_{i\to j} $e^{{-\epsilon_j/kT_e}}$ d\left(\frac{\epsilon_j}{kT_e}\right).$$ The scattering runs use targets truncated to the lowest 57 (Sr I), 65 (Sr III), 70 (Sr IV), and 95 (Sr V) levels, all shifted to the experimental energies, with partial-wave top-up and Burgess–Tully infinite-energy points to handle the higher partial waves. A final, equally important component is the collisional-radiative solver that turns the atomic data into level populations and photon emissivity coefficients, which is what lets the authors scan for density- and temperature-sensitive lines.

What would settle it

A direct measurement of the electron-impact excitation cross-section for the Sr V ground-term forbidden transition at 1203.35 nm in a merged electron-ion beam or storage-ring experiment at energies around 0.1–1 Ryd; if the resulting Maxwellian-averaged effective collision strength differs from the paper's value significantly, the kilonova diagnostic prediction loses its quantitative basis. Alternatively, a high-resolution infrared spectrum of a kilonova at 1.15–1.25 µm across several epochs that shows no 1203.35 nm feature while Sr II lines evolve normally would call the modelled Sr V ionisation or excitation rates into question.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central deliverable is a self-consistent set of atomic data — fine-structure energy levels, Einstein A coefficients, and Maxwellian-averaged effective collision strengths $\Upsilon_{i\to j}$ — for Sr I, Sr III, Sr IV, and Sr V, presented in adf04 format for use in NLTE codes. Each target structure was built with either AUTOSTRUCTURE or GRASP0, with orbital scaling parameters tuned to reproduce the measured energy levels; for the scattering calculations the levels were shifted to their spectroscopic positions. The authors argue the new data are urgently needed because previously only Sr II had full R-matrix excitation data, while other ions had to rely on approximate van Regemorter or Axelrod rates. Running the data through a collisional-radiative solver, they find that in kilonova conditions the spectrum is dominated by Sr I and Sr II, but six higher-ionisation lines appear between 400 and 1300 nm, including a single Sr IV line at 1027.69 nm and five Sr V lines, the strongest being the 1-2 forbidden transition at 1203.35 nm. Because the Sr V line's photon emissivity varies with electron density in the $10^{6}$–$10^{9}$ cm$^{-3}$ range, the authors propose it as a candidate diagnostic for the ionisation stage reached in an evolving kilonova. They also identify one Sr III line ratio (1-4/1-3, 55.49/56.28 nm) as a narrow-range density and temperature diagnostic for kilonova plasmas, and one Sr V ratio (1-34/2-6) for white dwarf conditions; most other ratios were found to be poor because the level populations follow coronal or LTE behaviour.

Load-bearing premise

The collision strengths are only as good as the target structures, and for Sr V the fitted model's unshifted levels 2–5 are 20–24% off the measured values; everything then relies on shifting those levels to the measured positions, with no independent collision data anywhere to check the outcome.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Kilonova NLTE models can now replace approximate excitation rates for Sr I, Sr III, Sr IV, and Sr V with R-matrix effective collision strengths, which is expected to change predicted line strengths, especially for forbidden transitions.
  • The 1203.35 nm Sr V line becomes a concrete prediction: if strontium is ionised that far in a neutron-star merger, this near-infrared line should appear and vary with ejecta density as the remnant evolves.
  • White dwarf models of hot stars can test their Sr V line identifications against the new A-values and collision data rather than relying on structure calculations alone.
  • The Sr III 1-4/1-3 ratio (55.49/56.28 nm) offers a narrow but usable density and temperature diagnostic for kilonova plasma, and the Sr V 1-34/2-6 ratio does the same for white dwarf conditions.
  • The data provide a benchmark for evaluating the older van Regemorter and Axelrod approximations, quantifying where those approximations fail for forbidden transitions.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the Sr V 1-2 line is confirmed observationally, its density sensitivity could be exploited as a time-resolved probe of the ionisation structure of a kilonova, something the paper does not itself demonstrate.
  • Because the collision data are the first of their kind, an independent calculation using a different structure basis (e.g., a B-spline or convergent close-coupling approach) or a beam experiment at low energies would be the natural test of the Sr V target, where the unshifted levels 2–5 deviate by 20–24% before shifting.
  • The near-infrared window around 1.2 µm where the Sr V line falls is also the region of the disputed Sr II P Cygni line in AT2017gfo; the new data could help future analyses separate Sr II from Sr V contributions.
  • The paper's finding that most levels are in coronal or LTE conditions implies that, for many lines, simpler equilibrium modelling suffices, so the main observational payoff of the new data may concentrate in a handful of transitions — exactly the Sr IV/V lines the paper highlights.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents new atomic structure models and R-matrix electron-impact excitation calculations for Sr I, Sr III, Sr IV, and Sr V, together with energy levels, Einstein A coefficients, and Maxwellian-averaged effective collision strengths in adf04 format. The target structures are built with AUTOSTRUCTURE and GRASP0, and the computed energies and A-values are compared with NIST and with previous theoretical calculations. The new effective collision strengths are then used in the collisional-radiative code colradpy to generate synthetic spectra for the first five ionisation stages of Sr under kilonova and white-dwarf conditions. The authors identify candidate diagnostic lines, most prominently the Sr V 1-2 transition at 1203.35 nm, which they propose as a possible kilonova ionisation diagnostic.

Significance. If the collision data are reliable, this is a valuable contribution: it appears to be the first R-matrix treatment of electron-impact excitation for these four Sr ionisation stages, and the adf04 delivery format makes the data directly usable in NLTE modelling codes. The paper contains careful structure comparisons with NIST and with earlier calculations, and the A-value comparisons cover multiple independent theoretical approaches. However, the central deliverable—the effective collision strengths—has no independent benchmark in the paper, and the headline kilonova diagnostic claim is contradicted by the paper's own caveat about inter-ion PEC comparisons. The data may still be useful for modellers, but the diagnostic inference as currently stated is unsupported and needs to be substantially qualified or removed.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.1 and Abstract] The paper's own caveat that 'the relative heights of spectral features between ion stages have no physical meaning' is violated by the central diagnostic claim. The abstract and Section 4.1 identify the Sr V 1-2 line at 1203.35 nm as a benchmark for the degree of Sr ionisation in a kilonova, and Section 4.1 states it is 'stronger than the other Sr I and Sr II lines presented in the full spectra.' Because each PEC is normalised to its own ion's ground-state population, this inter-ion comparison is exactly the one the caveat forbids: a large Sr V PEC says nothing about whether Sr V is sufficiently abundant to emit. The claim should be retracted or explicitly recast as conditional on an assumed Sr V abundance or on a coupled ionisation balance.
  2. [§3.2–3.5] The central deliverable, the Maxwellian-averaged effective collision strengths, has no independent benchmark. For every ion the authors state that no other collision data exist in the literature with which to compare. Given that the accuracy of the collision strengths is inherited from the target structures, and given the Sr V energy errors noted in Table 13, the accuracy of the collision strengths is unquantified. I request a sensitivity test (for example, comparing collision strengths from the unshifted versus shifted target, or a distorted-wave cross-check) or an explicit uncertainty statement, before these data are used as benchmarks for astrophysical diagnostics.
  3. [§2.5, Table 13] The Sr V unshifted energy levels 2–5 differ from NIST by 19.9–24.4%. Since the scattering calculation uses levels shifted to their NIST positions, the target Hamiltonian and the shifted thresholds are inconsistent for these low-lying levels. For the 1203.35 nm (1–2) line, which is the headline diagnostic, this is particularly relevant because the transition lies within the ground configuration and the 24.4% error in level 2 affects threshold and resonance positions. The paper should discuss the possible impact of these large shifts on the effective collision strengths and, ideally, quantify it.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§3.5, Fig. 9] The text says the first sample Sr V transition is at 92.2397 nm, but the Figure 9 caption lists 101.371 nm for the same transition (4s24p34d 3F4 -> 4s24p35p 3D3). Table 14 contains both wavelengths. Please align these values and ensure the figure caption describes the correct transitions.
  2. [Table 13 caption] The caption states that 'the average percentage between the shifted and unshifted levels was 1.250%,' but the table lists only unshifted AS energies and NIST energies. Please clarify what is being averaged and, if shifted energies are used, show them explicitly.
  3. [§3.5] The text refers to 'bprmcodes'; this should likely be 'rmbp codes', matching the terminology used elsewhere in the paper.
  4. [Table captions 5, 8, 11, 14] Several table captions refer to the wrong table number for the level indices: Table 5 refers to 'Table 2' instead of Table 4, Table 8 refers to Table 7, Table 11 refers to Table 10, and Table 14 refers to Table 13. Please correct these cross-references.
  5. [§2.2, Eq. (6)] Equation (6) rescales A-values using NIST wavelengths, but it is not stated explicitly whether the A-values stored in the adf04 files are the rescaled values. Please state this clearly, since the collisional-radiative modelling in Section 4 uses these A-values.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Partial circularity: the Sr V 1203.35 nm line is proposed as a cross-ion kilonova diagnostic using exactly the inter-ion PEC comparison the paper declares physically meaningless, and the Sr I energy-level validation is the minimization objective of the fitted scaling parameters. The R-matrix collision strengths themselves are independently computed.

  1. self definitional [Abstract and Section 4.1, PEC definition around Eq. (11), Figures 10-11]
    "It is noted that the populations are carried out independently for each ion stage and therefore the relative heights of spectral features between ion stages have no physical meaning. Only the relative heights within an ion stage have significance. ... in the particular case of the 1203.35nm Srv line, stronger than the other Sri and Srii lines presented in the full spectra of Figure 10."

    The PEC is defined in Eq. (11) with the upper-level population weighted by the ground-state population of that same ion, and the populations are solved separately for each ion stage. Consequently, the relative height of an Sr V PEC against Sr I/Sr II PECs is set by the arbitrary per-ion normalization, not by the actual abundance of Sr V. The abstract and Section 4.1 nevertheless use the 'stronger than Sr I and Sr II' comparison to propose the 1203.35 nm line as a benchmark for the extent of Sr ionisation in a kilonova. That inference is precisely the cross-ion comparison the paper defines as physically meaningless, so the diagnostic claim reduces to the PEC normalization by construction rather than to any ionization balance.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Section 2.1 (methodology) and Section 2.2, Table 4]
    "Each λ_nl is varied such that the orbitals generated minimise the energy of the Hamiltonian and these target energies mimimise the absolute difference with NIST values (Kramida et al. (2023)). ... very good agreement is found with those reported in NIST. The levels deviate by <0.01 Ryd and the average relative percentage difference was found to be -2.10%."

    For Sr I the orbital scaling parameters were explicitly optimized to minimize the difference between the calculated target energies and the NIST energies. The subsequently tabulated 'agreement' with NIST in Table 4 is therefore the optimization objective, not an independent check of the structure model. The same is not true of the collision strengths, which come from R-matrix scattering on the shifted target, so this is a validation-circularity in the structure step rather than a fit of the central effective-collision-strength result.

full rationale

The paper's central deliverable, the Maxwellian-averaged effective collision strengths for Sr I, Sr III, Sr IV and Sr V, is produced by R-matrix scattering calculations (DARC/RMBP) on target structures whose energies are shifted to NIST positions. Nothing in the scattering calculation is fitted to the final effective collision strengths, and no literature collision data are used as an input, so the core atomic-data derivation is not circular. The paper is also transparent that no previous collision strengths exist for comparison. Two load-bearing steps do, however, reduce to their own inputs. First, the Sr I orbital scaling parameters are fitted to minimize energy differences with NIST, and the resulting energy-level agreement is then presented as validation; this makes the structure validation partly circular. Second, and more importantly, the identification of the Sr V 1203.35 nm line as a 'benchmark' for Sr ionisation in kilonovae uses the inter-ion PEC height comparison that Section 4.1 itself defines as having no physical meaning. Because each PEC is normalized to its own ion's ground state, the relative strength of Sr V versus Sr I/Sr II lines cannot constrain the degree of ionisation without a coupled ionization balance or assumed abundances, a point reinforced by the paper's own admission that only trace Sr IV/V are expected at kilonova temperatures. This is an internal-definitional problem in the diagnostic claim, not in the atomic data themselves. There is no significant load-bearing self-citation: the Sr II data of Mulholland et al. (2024) are used as external input from the same group, but the present conclusions do not rest on an unverified uniqueness theorem or ansatz imported from that citation. Overall, the central collision data are independently grounded, while the structure validation and the headline kilonova diagnostic contain partial circularity, giving a score of 4.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The collision calculations rely on standard R-matrix theory and on target structures that are fitted or tuned to NIST energy levels. The level calibration shifts and the absence of an independent collision benchmark mean the derived effective collision strengths inherit any target error. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • Sri orbital scaling parameters lambda_nl = 19 values, range 0.8322 to 1.2490, detailed in Table 3
    Each lambda_nl is varied so that the target energies minimise the absolute difference with NIST values (Section 2.1). These parameters shape the target structure and therefore the A-values and collision strengths.
  • Srv orbital scaling parameters lambda_nl = lambda_5f = 1.050, all other values 1.0
    Chosen by hand to produce the best Sr V energy levels (Section 2.5). The Sr V low-energy target is the least accurate of the four models before shifting.
  • Energy level calibration shifts = All scattering levels shifted to NIST positions; Sr V levels 2 to 5 shift by 0.018 to 0.080 Ryd
    The collision calculations use levels shifted to spectroscopic positions, and A-values are rescaled with NIST wavelengths via Eq. 6. This is a data-driven correction applied to every target.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The R-matrix close-coupling method accurately describes electron impact excitation for these heavy species.
    The method is standard and cited to Burke (2011), but no independent electron impact excitation data for these Sr ions is available to benchmark the results.
  • domain assumption NIST experimental energy levels are accurate references and can be used to shift computed levels.
    The paper relies on NIST values as the calibration standard for target parameters and level shifts. Errors in NIST assignments or energies would propagate into the collision data and line positions.
  • domain assumption The chosen configuration expansions are sufficiently complete for the transitions of interest.
    The target models use 19 to 24 orbitals and 21 to 29 configurations, but no convergence study is presented for the collision strengths.
  • domain assumption Each ion stage can be treated independently in the collisional radiative solver.
    The paper explicitly states in Section 4.1 that populations are carried out independently for each ion stage, so inter-ion PEC heights have no physical meaning. This limits the interpretation of the combined synthetic spectra.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Strontium I, III, IV and V: Electron Impact Excitation Data for Kilonovae and White Dwarf Diagnostic Applications." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KZUEKP4L

@misc{pith2026250509788,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Strontium I, III, IV and V: Electron Impact Excitation Data for Kilonovae and White Dwarf Diagnostic Applications},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KZUEKP4L}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.09788}
}
read the original abstract

Strontium (Sr) emissions have been observed across a wide range of astrophysical phenomena, from kilonovae (KNe) events to white dwarf (WD) stars. Precise and extensive atomic data for low ionisation stages of Sr is required for accurate theoretical modelling and to improve our understanding of evolutionary pathways. We calculated energy levels, Einstein A coefficients and electron-impact excitation collision strengths for Sr I, Sr III, Sr IV and Sr V at the temperature and density ranges of interest in KNe and WD research. We developed new target structures using the GRASP0 and AUTOSTRUCTURE packages. The energies and A-values arising from the new structures were found to be in good agreement with experimental and theoretical equivalents reported in the literature. Maxwellian averaged electron impact collision strengths were calculated using the R-matrix approach, as applied through the DARC and RMBP coding packages. These are presented in adf04 file format. The new data sets allowed us to construct synthetic spectra for the first five ionisation stages of Sr and probe possible density and temperature diagnostic lines. The synthetic spectra within the KNe regime revealed possible Sr IV and Sr V candidate lines at 1027.69nm and 1203.35nm respectively. These may provide useful benchmarks for determining the extent of Sr ionisation that can be reached in an evolving KNe event. Additional diagnostic lines were found to be poor across the Sr ion stages for both KNe and WD regimes due to most levels being in either coronal or Local Thermodynamic Equilibrium (LTE) conditions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.09788 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A comparison of the Einstein A-values for dipole transitions from the AS Sr i model and those for which there is an equivalent literature value. The literature A-values were obtained from Kelly & Mathur (1976), Parkinson et al. (1976), Vaeck et al. (1988), García & Campos(1988), Werij et al. (1992) and Drozdowski et al. (1997). . MNRAS 000, 1–18 (2025) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. A comparison of the Einstein A-values for transitions from the grasp0 Sr iii model and their equivalents from other calculations in the literature, Sureau et al. (1984) and Loginov & Tuchkin (2001). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. A comparison of the Einstein A-values for transitions from the GRASP0 Sr iv model and the literature A-values of Aggarwal & Keenan (2015) and Rauch et al. (2017). . results to those from a second Sr iv model constructed using the Flexible Atomic Code (FAC, Gu (2008)). In [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (11 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: A comparison of the Einstein A-values for dipole transitions from the AS Sr v model and their equivalents from other structure calculations in the literature. The literature A-values were obtained from Rauch et al. (2017). and Aloui et al. (2022) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figu…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison between the energy levels derived from the AS and grasp0 models of a) - Sr i, b) - Sr iii, c) - Sr iv and d) - Sr v, compared to their equivalent values obtained from NIST. 3 ELECTRON IMPACT EXCITATION 3.1 𝑅-matrix Methodology The 𝑅-matrix approach is employ…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Collision strengths (Top Row) and corresponding effective collision strengths (Bottom Row) for selected transitions in Sr i. The transitions selected are 5s2 1S0 → 5s5p 1P ◦ 1 (Left Column), 5s5p 3P ◦ 2 → 5s6s 3S1 (Centre Column) and 5s2 1S0 → 5s5p 3P ◦ 2 (Right Column…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The Collision (Top Row) and Effective Collision (Bottom Row) Strengths of selected transitions in our Sr iii target. The transitions selected are 4p6 1S0 → 4p55s 1P ◦ 1 (Left Column), 4p6 1S0 → 4p54d 3D ◦ 1 (Centre Column) and 4p6 1S0 → 4p54d 1P ◦ 1 (Right Column), and…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The Collision (Top Row) and Effective Collision (Bottom Row) Strengths of selected transitions in our Sr iv target. The transitions selected are 4s24p5 2P ◦ 3/2 → 4s4p6 2S1/2 (Left Column), 4s24p5 2P ◦ 3/2 → 4s24p45s 2D5/2 (Centre Column) and 4s24p45p 2D ◦ 5/2 → 4s24p4…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The Collision (Top Row) and Effective Collision (Bottom Row) Strengths of selected transitions in our Sr v target. The transitions selected are 4s24p34d 3F ◦ 4 → 4s24p35p 3D3 (Left Column), 4s24p35p 5P3 → 4s24p35d 5D ◦ 2 (Centre Column) and 4s24p35p 5P3 → 4s24p35d 5D ◦…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The Photon Emissivity Coefficients (PECs) for the first five ionisation stages of Sr for a plasma of electron temperatures and densities relevant to KNe (left panel) and WD (right panel) events in the wavelength window of 0 - 5000nm [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The Photon Emissivity Coefficient (PECs) for Sr iv and v over a wavelength range of 400nm to 1300nm at a temperature of 0.30eV at different electron density parameters. The PEC corresponding to each ion is highlighted above each line. behaviours of the remaining excit…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The variations in the fractional population of the first 10 levels of Sr i, iii, iv and v with electron temperature of the plasma at 𝑇𝑒 =0.50eV. The region applicable to KNe events is highlighted between the two black, dashed, vertical lines. In the KNe regime ( [PIT…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Sample density (left) and temperature (right) diagnostic line ratios for Sr iii under KNe conditions. The line ratio employed was 1−4 1−3 , which corresponds to the transitions 4p6 1S0 → 4p54d 3P ◦ 2 (𝜆 = 55.49nm) and 4p6 1S0 → 4p54d 3P ◦ 1 (𝜆 = 56.28nm) [PITH_FULL_I…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Sample density (left) and temperature (right) diagnostic lines for Sr v under WD conditions. The line ratio employed was 1−34 2−6 , which corresponds to the transitions 4p4 3P2 → 4p34d 3D ◦ 3 (𝜆 = 39.47nm) and 4s24p4 3P1 → 4s4p5 3P ◦ 2 (𝜆 = 68.64nm). 55.49nm and 56.28…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

103 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.state := if if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTION or pop #1...

  2. [2]

    S., Ye J., 2024, @doi [Physical Review Letters] 10.1103/physrevlett.133.023401 , 133

    Aeppli A., Kim K., Warfield W., Safronova M. S., Ye J., 2024, @doi [Physical Review Letters] 10.1103/physrevlett.133.023401 , 133

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.133.023401 2024

  3. [3]

    M., Keenan F

    Aggarwal K. M., Keenan F. P., 2015, @doi [Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables] https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adt.2015.04.001 , 105-106, 9

    doi:10.1016/j.adt.2015.04.001 2015

  4. [4]

    Aloui R., Elabidi H., Sahal-Bréchot S., 2022, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stac405 , 512, 1598–1607

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac405 2022

  5. [5]

    M., Spite F., Korotin S

    Andrievsky S. M., Spite F., Korotin S. A., Fran c ois P., Spite M., Bonifacio P., Cayrel R., Hill V., 2011, @doi [Astronomy &amp; Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201116591 , 530, A105

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201116591 2011

  6. [6]

    Aoki W., et al., 2022, @doi [Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan] 10.1093/pasj/psab123 , 74, 273–282

    doi:10.1093/pasj/psab123 2022

  7. [7]

    A., Wynne J

    Armstrong J. A., Wynne J. J., Esherick P., 1979, @doi [Journal of the Optical Society of America] 10.1364/JOSA.69.000211 , 69, 211–230

    doi:10.1364/josa.69.000211 1979

  8. [8]

    S., 1980, PhD Thesis - University of California, Snata Cruz

    Axelrod T. S., 1980, PhD Thesis - University of California, Snata Cruz

    1980

Show all 103 references
  1. [9]

    R., 1986, @doi [Journal of Physics B: Atomic and Molecular Physics] 10.1088/0022-3700/19/22/023 , 19, 3827

    Badnell N. R., 1986, @doi [Journal of Physics B: Atomic and Molecular Physics] 10.1088/0022-3700/19/22/023 , 19, 3827

    1986 doi

  2. [10]

    R., 1997, @doi [Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics] 10.1088/0953-4075/30/1/005 , 30, 1

    Badnell N. R., 1997, @doi [Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics] 10.1088/0953-4075/30/1/005 , 30, 1

    1997 doi

  3. [11]

    P., 2024, DARC R-Matrix Codes, https://connorb.freeshell.org//

    Ballance C. P., 2024, DARC R-Matrix Codes, https://connorb.freeshell.org//

    2024

  4. [12]

    S., O’Mara B

    Barklem P. S., O’Mara B. J., 2000, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03090.x , 311, 535–540

    2000

  5. [13]

    A., Holberg J

    Barstow M. A., Holberg J. B., Werner K., Buckley D. A. H., Stobie R. S., 1994, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/267.3.653 , 267, 653–659

    1994 doi

  6. [14]

    R., Kingston A

    Bates D. R., Kingston A. E., McWhirter R. W. P., 1962, @doi [Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences] 10.1098/rspa.1962.0101 , 267, 297

    1962

  7. [15]

    A., Gull T

    Bautista M. A., Gull T. R., Ishibashi K., Hartman H., Davidson K., 2002, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05250.x , 331, 875

    2002

  8. [16]

    J., 1982a, @doi [Physica Scripta] 10.1088/0031-8949/26/3/007 , 26, 183–188

    Beigang R., Lücke K., Schmidt D., Timmermann A., West P. J., 1982a, @doi [Physica Scripta] 10.1088/0031-8949/26/3/007 , 26, 183–188

    doi

  9. [17]

    Beigang R., Lücke K., Timmermann A., West P., Frölich D., 1982b, @doi [Optics Communications] https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-4018(82)90082-7 , 42, 19

    doi

  10. [18]

    A., Ruchti G

    Bergemann M., Juul Hansen C., Bautista M. A., Ruchti G. R., 2012, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201219406 , 546

    2012 doi

  11. [19]

    B., 1974, @doi [Journal of Physics B: Atomic and Molecular Physics] 10.1088/0022-3700/7/17/026 , 7, 2403–2416

    Burgess A., Sheorey V. B., 1974, @doi [Journal of Physics B: Atomic and Molecular Physics] 10.1088/0022-3700/7/17/026 , 7, 2403–2416

    1974 doi

  12. [20]

    A., 1992, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 254, 436–453

    Burgess A., Tully J. A., 1992, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 254, 436–453

    1992

  13. [21]

    G., 2011, R-Matrix Theory of Atomic Collisions: Application to Atomic, Molecular and Optical Processes

    Burke P. G., 2011, R-Matrix Theory of Atomic Collisions: Application to Atomic, Molecular and Optical Processes. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, @doi 10.1007/978-3-642-15931-2 , http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15931-2

    2011 doi

  14. [22]

    M., Seaton M

    Burke V. M., Seaton M. J., 1986, @doi [Journal of Physics B: Atomic and Molecular Physics] 10.1088/0022-3700/19/15/002 , 19, L527–L533

    1986 doi

  15. [23]

    Carvajal Gallego H., Deprince J., Maison L., Palmeri P., Quinet P., 2024, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/202347723 , 685, A91

    2024 doi

  16. [24]

    G., Huang W., 2009, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637x/701/2/1053 , 701, 1053–1075

    Cohen J. G., Huang W., 2009, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637x/701/2/1053 , 701, 1053–1075

    2009 doi

  17. [25]

    P., Farooq W

    Connerade J. P., Farooq W. A., Ma H., Nawaz M., Shen N., 1992, @doi [Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics] 10.1088/0953-4075/25/7/012 , 25, 1405–1426

    1992 doi

  18. [26]

    G., Graves G

    Conroy C., van Dokkum P. G., Graves G. J., 2013, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/2041-8205/763/2/l25 , 763, L25

    2013 doi

  19. [27]

    Los Alamos Series in Basic and Applied Sciences, University of California Press, https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=avgkDQAAQBAJ

    Cowan R., 1981, The Theory of Atomic Structure and Spectra. Los Alamos Series in Basic and Applied Sciences, University of California Press, https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=avgkDQAAQBAJ

    1981

  20. [28]

    J., et al., 2002, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/340347 , 572, 861–879

    Cowan J. J., et al., 2002, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/340347 , 572, 861–879

    2002 doi

  21. [29]

    L., Tisserand P., Clayton G

    Crawford C. L., Tisserand P., Clayton G. C., Munson B., 2022, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/202142882 , 667, A85

    2022 doi

  22. [30]

    J., 1995, @doi [Physical Review A] 10.1103/PhysRevA.52.4416 , 52, 4416

    Dai C. J., 1995, @doi [Physical Review A] 10.1103/PhysRevA.52.4416 , 52, 4416

    1995 doi

  23. [31]

    J., Hu S

    Dai C. J., Hu S. F., Lu J., 1996, @doi [Journal of Quantitative Spectroscopy & Radiative Transfer] 10.1016/0022-4073(96)00032-5 , 56, 255–262

    1996 doi

  24. [32]

    Drozdowski R., Ignaciuk M., Kwela J., Heldt J., 1997, @doi [Zeitschrift f\" u r Physik D Atoms, Molecules and Clusters] 10.1007/s004600050300 , 41, 125–131

    1997 doi

  25. [33]

    P., Johnson C., Parpia F., Plummer E., 1989, @doi [Computer Physics Communications] 10.1016/0010-4655(89)90136-7 , 55

    Dyall K., Grant I. P., Johnson C., Parpia F., Plummer E., 1989, @doi [Computer Physics Communications] 10.1016/0010-4655(89)90136-7 , 55

    1989 doi

  26. [34]

    Eissner W., 1991, @doi [Le Journal de Physique IV] 10.1051/JP4:1991101 , 01

    1991 doi

  27. [35]

    Falke S., et al., 2014, @doi [New Journal of Physics] 10.1088/1367-2630/16/7/073023 , 16, 073023

    2014 doi

  28. [36]

    J., et al., 2017, @doi [Revista Mexicana de Astronomía y Astrofísica] 10.48550/ARXIV.1705.10877 , 53, 385

    Ferland G. J., et al., 2017, @doi [Revista Mexicana de Astronomía y Astrofísica] 10.48550/ARXIV.1705.10877 , 53, 385

    2017 doi arXiv

  29. [37]

    S., Ramsbottom C., Ballance C., 2020, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/MNRAS/STAA1710 , 496

    Fernández-Menchero L., Jeffery C. S., Ramsbottom C., Ballance C., 2020, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/MNRAS/STAA1710 , 496

    2020 doi

  30. [38]

    M., 2006, @doi [Phys

    Ferrari G., Poli N., Sorrentino F., Tino G. M., 2006, @doi [Phys. Rev. Lett.] 10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.060402 , 97, 060402

    2006 doi

  31. [39]

    Fran c ois P., Monaco L., Bonifacio P., Moni Bidin C., Geisler D., Sbordone L., 2016, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201527181 , 588, A7

    2016 doi

  32. [40]

    García G., Campos J., 1988, @doi [Journal of Quantitative Spectroscopy and Radiative Transfer] 10.1016/0022-4073(88)90093-3 , 39, 477–483

    1988 doi

  33. [41]

    Garton W. R. S., Codling K., 1968, @doi [Journal of Physics B: Atomic and Molecular Physics] 10.1088/0022-3700/1/1/316 , 1, 106–113

    1968 doi

  34. [42]

    Garton W. R. S., Connerade J. P., Baig M. A., Hormes J., Alexa B., 1983, @doi [Journal of Physics B: Atomic and Molecular Physics] 10.1088/0022-3700/16/3/014 , 16, 389–397

    1983 doi

  35. [43]

    H., Smartt S

    Gillanders J. H., Smartt S. J., Sim S. A., Bauswein A., Goriely S., 2022, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stac1258 , 515, 631–651

    2022 doi

  36. [44]

    H., Sim S

    Gillanders J. H., Sim S. A., Smartt S. J., Goriely S., Bauswein A., 2023, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stad3688 , 529, 2918–2945

    2023 doi

  37. [45]

    Goswami A., Aoki W., 2013, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/2041-8205/763/2/l37 , 763, L37

    2013 doi

  38. [46]

    Goutis S., Aymar M., Kompitsas M., Camus P., 1992, @doi [Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics] 10.1088/0953-4075/25/16/005 , 25, 3433–3461

    1992 doi

  39. [47]

    P., McKenzie B., Norrington P., Mayers D., Pyper N

    Grant I. P., McKenzie B., Norrington P., Mayers D., Pyper N. C., 1984, @doi [Computer Physics Communications] 10.1016/S0010-4655(84)82819-2 , 35

    1984 doi

  40. [48]

    G., Sneden C., 1994, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 287, 927

    Gratton R. G., Sneden C., 1994, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 287, 927

    1994

  41. [49]

    F., 2008, @doi [Canadian Journal of Physics] 10.1139/p07-197 , 86, 675–689

    Gu M. F., 2008, @doi [Canadian Journal of Physics] 10.1139/p07-197 , 86, 675–689

    2008 doi

  42. [50]

    E., Persson W., 1973, @doi [Physica Scripta] 10.1088/0031-8949/8/6/010 , 8, 279–284

    Hansen J. E., Persson W., 1973, @doi [Physica Scripta] 10.1088/0031-8949/8/6/010 , 8, 279–284

    1973 doi

  43. [51]

    E., Persson W., 1976, @doi [Physica Scripta] 10.1088/0031-8949/13/3/005 , 13, 166–180

    Hansen J. E., Persson W., 1976, @doi [Physica Scripta] 10.1088/0031-8949/13/3/005 , 13, 166–180

    1976 doi

  44. [52]

    Hassouneh O., Salah W., 2022, @doi [The European Physical Journal Plus] 10.1140/epjp/s13360-022-03151-2 , 137

    2022 doi

  45. [53]

    R., 2019, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4654 , 885, 33

    Hirai Y., Wanajo S., Saitoh T. R., 2019, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4654 , 885, 33

    2019 doi

  46. [54]

    Hotokezaka K., Tanaka M., Kato D., Gaigalas G., 2023, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters] 10.1093/mnrasl/slad128 , 526, L155–L159

    2023 doi

  47. [55]

    D., Carter V

    Hudson R. D., Carter V. L., Young P. A., 1969, @doi [Physical Review] 10.1103/physrev.180.77 , 180, 77–83

    1969 doi

  48. [56]

    Jimoyiannis A., Bolovinos A., Tsekeris P., Camus P., 1993, @doi [Zeitschrift f\" u r Physik D Atoms, Molecules and Clusters] 10.1007/bf01450166 , 25, 135–144

    1993 doi

  49. [57]

    Johnson C., Loch S., Ennis D., 2019, @doi [Nuclear Materials and Energy] https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nme.2019.01.013 , 20, 100579

    2019 doi

  50. [58]

    Kasen D., Metzger B., Barnes J., Quataert E., Ramirez-Ruiz E., 2017, @doi [Nature] 10.1038/nature24453 , 551, 80–84

    2017 doi

  51. [59]

    M., Mathur M

    Kelly F. M., Mathur M. S., 1976, @doi [Canadian Journal of Physics] 10.1139/p80-181 , 58, 1416–1419

    1976 doi

  52. [60]

    E., Sim S

    Kerzendorf W. E., Sim S. A., 2014, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stu055 , 440, 387–404

    2014 doi

  53. [61]

    Kl\" u sener V., et al., 2024, @doi [Physical Review Letters] 10.1103/physrevlett.132.253201 , 132

    2024 doi

  54. [62]

    A., Robaux O., Aymar M., Camus P., 1990, @doi [Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics] 10.1088/0953-4075/23/14/014 , 23, 2247–2267

    Kompitsas M., Cohen S., Nicolaides C. A., Robaux O., Aymar M., Camus P., 1990, @doi [Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics] 10.1088/0953-4075/23/14/014 , 23, 2247–2267

    1990 doi

  55. [63]

    Kompitsas M., Goutis S., Aymar M., Camus P., 1991, @doi [Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics] 10.1088/0953-4075/24/7/011 , 24, 1557–1574

    1991 doi

  56. [64]

    A., 2023, NIST Atomic Spectral Database (v 5.11), [Online], Available https://physics.nist.gov/asd [date]

    Kramida A., Ralchenko Y., Reader J., Team N. A., 2023, NIST Atomic Spectral Database (v 5.11), [Online], Available https://physics.nist.gov/asd [date]

    2023

  57. [65]

    Kunze S., et al., 1993, @doi [European Physical Journal D] 10.1007/BF01426757 , 27, 111–114

    1993 doi

  58. [66]

    M., Mackie F., Ravenhall D

    Lattimer J. M., Mackie F., Ravenhall D. G., Schramm D. N., 1977, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/155148 , 213, 225

    1977 doi

  59. [67]

    V., Tuchkin V

    Loginov A. V., Tuchkin V. I., 2001, @doi [Optics and Spectroscopy] 10.1134/1.1397835 , 91, 165–176

    2001 doi

  60. [68]

    Lu X., Guo F., Wang Y., Feng M., Liang T., Lu B., Chang H., 2023, @doi [Phys. Rev. A] 10.1103/PhysRevA.108.012820 , 108, 012820

    2023 doi

  61. [69]

    P., Norrington P., 1984, @doi [Computer Physics Communications] 10.1016/S0010-4655(84)82820-9 , 35

    McKenzie B., Grant I. P., Norrington P., 1984, @doi [Computer Physics Communications] 10.1016/S0010-4655(84)82820-9 , 35

    1984 doi

  62. [70]

    F., 1933, @doi [Bureau of Standards Journal of Research] 10.6028/jres.010.049 , 10, 669

    Meggers W. F., 1933, @doi [Bureau of Standards Journal of Research] 10.6028/jres.010.049 , 10, 669

    1933 doi

  63. [71]

    P., McElroy N

    Mulholland L. P., McElroy N. E., McNeill F. L., Sim S. A., Ballance C. P., Ramsbottom C. A., 2024, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stae1615 , 532, 2289

    2024 doi

  64. [72]

    H., O’Connor S., Learner R

    Newsom G. H., O’Connor S., Learner R. C. M., 1973, @doi [Journal of Physics B: Atomic and Molecular Physics] 10.1088/0022-3700/6/10/028 , 6, 2162–2176

    1973 doi

  65. [73]

    H., Grant I

    Norrington P. H., Grant I. P., 1987, @doi [Journal of Physics B: Atomic and Molecular Physics] 10.1088/0022-3700/20/18/023 , 20, 4869–4881

    1987 doi

  66. [74]

    OPEN-ADAS 2024, https://open.adas.ac.uk/

    2024

  67. [75]

    H., Reeves E

    Parkinson W. H., Reeves E. M., Tomkins F. S., 1976, @doi [Journal of Physics B: Atomic and Molecular Physics] 10.1088/0022-3700/9/2/006 , 9, 157–165

    1976 doi

  68. [76]

    K., Rapol U

    Patel K., Gakkhar P., Biswas K., Sagar Maurya S., Dutta P., Lal V., Mani B. K., Rapol U. D., 2024, @doi [Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics] 10.1088/1361-6455/ad3bff , 57, 105501

    2024 doi

  69. [77]

    Perego A., et al., 2022, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac3751 , 925, 22

    2022 doi

  70. [78]

    Persson W., 1978, @doi [Physica Scripta] 10.1088/0031-8949/17/4/001 , 17, 387–410

    1978 doi

  71. [79]

    Persson W., Valind S., 1972, @doi [Physica Scripta] 10.1088/0031-8949/5/4-5/008 , 5, 187–200

    1972 doi

  72. [80]

    Persson W., Wahlstr\" o m C.-G., 1984, @doi [Physica Scripta] 10.1088/0031-8949/30/3/003 , 30, 169–185

    1984 doi

  73. [81]

    Qiao C., et al., 2019, @doi [Applied Physics B] 10.1007/s00340-019-7328-3 , 125

    2019 doi

  74. [82]

    M., Rieger G., Pinnington E

    Quinet P., Palmeri P., Biémont E., McCurdy M. M., Rieger G., Pinnington E. H., Wickliffe M. E., Lawler J. E., 1999, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.02689.x , 307, 934–940

    1999

  75. [83]

    W., Demleitner M., 2017, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201730383 , 606, A105

    Rauch T., Quinet P., Kn\" o rzer M., Hoyer D., Werner K., Kruk J. W., Demleitner M., 2017, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201730383 , 606, A105

    2017 doi

  76. [84]

    L., Ekberg J

    Reader J., Epstein G. L., Ekberg J. O., 1972, @doi [Journal of the Optical Society of America] 10.1364/josa.62.000273 , 62, 273

    1972 doi

  77. [85]

    R., Borgstr\" o m S

    Rubbmark J. R., Borgstr\" o m S. A., 1978, @doi [Physica Scripta] 10.1088/0031-8949/18/4/002 , 18, 196–208

    1978 doi

  78. [86]

    E., 2012, @doi [Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data] 10.1063/1.3659413 , 41

    Sansonetti J. E., 2012, @doi [Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data] 10.1063/1.3659413 , 41

    2012 doi

  79. [87]

    E., Nave G., 2010, @doi [Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data] 10.1063/1.3449176 , 39

    Sansonetti J. E., Nave G., 2010, @doi [Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data] 10.1063/1.3449176 , 39

    2010 doi

  80. [88]

    V., Lambert D

    Smith V. V., Lambert D. L., 1990, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series] 10.1086/191421 , 72, 387

    1990 doi

  81. [89]

    Sneppen A., Watson D., 2023, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/202346421 , 675, A194

    2023 doi

  82. [90]

    M., 2006, @doi [Modern Physics Letters B] 10.1142/s0217984906011682 , 20, 1287–1320

    Sorrentino F., Ferrari G., Poli N., Drullinger R., Tino G. M., 2006, @doi [Modern Physics Letters B] 10.1142/s0217984906011682 , 20, 1287–1320

    2006 doi

  83. [91]

    Sullivan F., 1938, PhD Thesis - University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh

    1938

  84. [92]

    P., et al., 2006, @doi [Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion] 10.1088/0741-3335/48/2/007 , 48, 263–293

    Summers H. P., et al., 2006, @doi [Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion] 10.1088/0741-3335/48/2/007 , 48, 263–293

    2006 doi

  85. [93]

    Sureau A., Guennou H., Cornille M., 1984, @doi [Journal of Physics B: Atomic and Molecular Physics] 10.1088/0022-3700/17/4/010 , 17

    1984 doi

  86. [94]

    Tarumi Y., Hotokezaka K., Domoto N., Tanaka M., 2023, Non-LTE analysis for Helium and Strontium lines in the kilonova AT2017gfo, @doi 10.48550/ARXIV.2302.13061 , https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.13061

    2023 doi arXiv

  87. [95]

    J., Bloch I., Blatt S., 2023, @doi [Physical Review Research] 10.1103/physrevresearch.5.013219 , 5

    Trautmann J., Yankelev D., Kl\" u sener V., Park A. J., Bloch I., Blatt S., 2023, @doi [Physical Review Research] 10.1103/physrevresearch.5.013219 , 5

    2023 doi

  88. [96]

    E., 1988, @doi [Phys

    Vaeck N., Godefroid M., Hansen J. E., 1988, @doi [Phys. Rev. A] 10.1103/PhysRevA.38.2830 , 38, 2830

    1988 doi

  89. [97]

    D., Zucker D., Wallerstein G., 1999, The Astrophysical Journal, 514, 932

    Vanture A. D., Zucker D., Wallerstein G., 1999, The Astrophysical Journal, 514, 932

    1999

  90. [98]

    J., Haggard D., Ford N., Drout M

    Vieira N., Ruan J. J., Haggard D., Ford N., Drout M. R., Fernández R., Badnell N. R., 2023, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/acae72 , 944, 123

    2023 doi

  91. [99]

    J., Haggard D., Ford N

    Vieira N., Ruan J. J., Haggard D., Ford N. M., Drout M. R., Fernández R., 2024, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1193 , 962, 33

    2024 doi

  92. [100]

    A., Noebauer U

    Vogl C., Sim S. A., Noebauer U. M., Kerzendorf W. E., Hillebrandt W., 2019, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201833701 , 621, A29

    2019 doi

  93. [101]

    Watson D., et al., 2019, @doi [Nature] 10.1038/s41586-019-1676-3 , 574, 497–500

    2019 doi

  94. [102]

    Werij H. G. C., Greene C. H., Theodosiou C. E., Gallagher A., 1992, @doi [Phys. Rev. A] 10.1103/PhysRevA.46.1248 , 46, 1248

    1992 doi

  95. [103]

    van Regemorter H., 1962, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/147445 , 136, 906

    1962 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.