Correlations of $Q_{\beta}$-values with symmetry energy and effective mass studied within Skyrme energy--density functionals

Futoshi Minato; Kenichi Yoshida; YiFei Niu

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 70 references

Correlations of $Q_{\beta}$-values with symmetry energy and effective mass studied within Skyrme energy--density functionals

T0 review · 3 major / 6 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 Beta-decay Q-values favor Skyrme functionals with symmetry energy 32.8 ± 0.7 MeV and effective mass at least 0.75.

desk verdict A transparent Skyrme-EDF correlation study with a plausible but under-supported central parameter window; the quasiparticle approximation may be shaping the result. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.10247 v1 pith:B6B7TVD3 submitted 2025-05-15 nucl-th nucl-ex

Futoshi Minato , Yifei Niu , Kenichi Yoshida This is my paper · ORCID

classification nucl-thnucl-ex PACS 21.60.Jz21.65.Ef23.40.-s

keywords Q_betavaluesSkyrmeenergy-densityfunctionalssymmetryenergyeffectivemassbetadecayHartree-Fock-Bogoliubovr-processnucleosynthesisPearsoncorrelation

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 tries to identify which nuclear bulk properties control how well a Skyrme energy-density functional reproduces measured beta-decay Q-values, and to turn that into a practical selection criterion. By computing Q_beta for 215 even-even nuclei with 42 Skyrme functionals under spherical symmetry, it finds that the average error correlates with the symmetry energy at low densities, while the scatter of errors is smaller for functionals with effective mass m*/m at or above 0.75. The paper concludes that a saturation symmetry energy of 32.8 ± 0.7 MeV together with m*/m ≥ 0.75 is the window most likely to reproduce experimental Q_beta systematically. If true, this gives a cheap, physics-based filter for choosing functionals before expensive beta-decay or r-process calculations.

What carries the argument

The engine of the analysis is the non-interacting quasiparticle approximation for Q_beta, Q_beta ≈ ΔM_nH − λ_p + λ_n − E_{2qp,lowest}, which replaces the odd-daughter binding-energy difference with Fermi energies and the lowest two-quasiparticle energy, so that only even-even spherical Skyrme-HFB calculations are needed. A pairing scaling factor f(x), fit linearly to the effective mass x = m*/m, is tuned to reproduce empirical pairing gaps from the three-point mass difference, removing pairing as a source of variation across functionals. The argument then runs on Pearson correlation coefficients between Q_beta errors and bulk parameters — symmetry energy Esym(rho) at 0.34, 0.76, 1.00, and 1.50 rho0, effective mass, saturation density, and incompressibility — followed by a quadratic fit of the RMS deviation gamma versus Esym(rho) that yields the optimal symmetry-energy value at each density. This machinery isolates the symmetry-energy and effective-mass dependence that otherwise would be entangled with pairing strengths and single-particle level densities.

What would settle it

Redo the analysis on a subset of the 215 nuclei using HFB calculations with explicit blocking and deformation, for example in the A ≈ 100–150 region: if the RMS minimum moves away from J = 32.8 ± 0.7 MeV or the m*/m ≥ 0.75 advantage disappears, the claimed window is an artifact of Eq. (4) and the spherical assumption. A cheaper check is to compute Q_beta for the same nuclei with two functionals that share J ≈ 32.8 MeV but have m*/m below 0.75, using full blocking, and see whether their gamma drops to the level of SkT1*.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that experimental Q_beta values themselves select a narrow range of Skyrme functional parameters: a symmetry energy J = 32.8 ± 0.7 MeV at saturation density and an effective mass m*/m ≥ 0.75. This emerges from a Pearson-correlation analysis and a quadratic least-squares fit of the RMS deviation gamma against the symmetry energy at several densities; the minimum of gamma sits at 16.9 ± 0.4 MeV at 0.34 rho0, 27.2 ± 0.3 MeV at 0.76 rho0, 32.8 ± 0.7 MeV at rho0, and 40.4 ± 6.5 MeV at 1.50 rho0, with the low-density constraints much sharper. The paper also establishes that the mean deviation mu is positively correlated with low-density symmetry energy and essentially uncorrelated with effective mass, whereas gamma is negatively correlated with effective mass. Functionals such as LNS, the SkT family, KIDS0, KIDSA, SQMC650, and SQMC700 fall in the preferred window and give the smallest deviations; SkT1* has the lowest gamma among all 42. The message is that Q_beta data can constrain the symmetry energy below saturation, provided the effective mass is kept above 0.75.

Load-bearing premise

The result rests on the non-interacting quasiparticle approximation for Q_beta (Eq. 4) together with the assumption that all 215 nuclei are spherical; if that approximation distorts Q_beta in a way that depends on symmetry energy or effective mass, the preferred window J = 32.8 ± 0.7 MeV and m*/m ≥ 0.75 could be shifted or spurious.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

A functional with J near 32.8 ± 0.7 MeV and m*/m > 0.75 is expected to reproduce measured Q_beta for even-even nuclei with RMS deviation around or below 1.3 MeV; SkT1* is the best single case.
Experimental Q_beta values constitute a new low-density constraint on the symmetry energy: the analysis pins Esym(0.34 rho0) ≈ 16.9 ± 0.4 MeV and Esym(0.76 rho0) ≈ 27.2 ± 0.3 MeV, tighter than at saturation density.
Functionals with m*/m ≤ 0.75 systematically give larger Q_beta errors, with deviations concentrated near magic and semi-magic nuclei such as 22O, 30,32Ne, 56Ca, 132,134,136Sn, and 208,210,216,218Pb.
For full beta-decay half-life predictions, the Q_beta window must be combined with a separate criterion for the Gamow-Teller strength function: the paper notes that among the preferred functionals, LNS, SQMC650, and SQMC700 also have large Landau parameter G'_0, whereas the SkT family does not.
The optimal symmetry energy is sharply determined only below saturation; above rho0 the quadratic curves flatten, so Q_beta alone cannot constrain high-density symmetry energy.

Reading between the lines

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

A practical workflow suggested but not stated by the paper: screen any candidate Skyrme functional by its saturation J and m*/m before committing to QRPA beta-decay calculations; this could save the cost of full strength-function calculations for functionals that fail the Q_beta window.
The apparent effectiveness of the m*/m ≥ 0.75 cut may be partly an artifact of Eq. (4): low effective mass gives sparse single-particle spectra, and the non-interacting quasiparticle approximation may mishandle blocking in exactly those cases; testing a few m*/m ≤ 0.75 functionals with explicit blocking would show whether the cut persists.
Because beta-decay half-lives scale steeply with Q_beta, the 0.7 MeV uncertainty in the preferred symmetry energy translates into substantially larger uncertainties in half-lives; the correlation found here could be recast as a direct constraint on half-life predictions for r-process waiting-point nuclei.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The paper is worth reading if you work with Skyrme EDFs for beta decay. What is genuinely new: it extends the known symmetry-energy/Q_beta correlation from odd-A nuclei to 215 even-even nuclei across 42 functionals, adds a density-dependent analysis, and shows that functionals with m*/m > 0.75 have systematically lower RMS deviations. The empirical pairing-scaling relation f(x) is also a useful practical result. The Table I compilation of functional properties plus gamma values is a handy reference.

The soft spots, in proportion. The central claim—that J = 32.8 ± 0.7 MeV and m*/m ≥ 0.75 is the most likely parameter window—is not as solid as the abstract implies. The optimal J comes from fitting a quadratic to gamma versus Esym using the same experimental Q_beta data the paper claims to describe. That is a fitted minimum, not an independent validation. The quoted uncertainty covers only the least-squares fit, not systematic errors from the model or the data selection. The m*/m ≥ 0.75 split is a hand-chosen grouping, and no significance tests are given for the Pearson coefficients. None of this kills the paper, but it means the conclusion is a heuristic, not a constraint.

The stress-test concern about Eq. (4) has real teeth. Replacing the actual mass difference with chemical potentials plus the lowest two-quasiparticle energy ignores blocking and time-odd fields, and the error is likely not constant across the functional set. For low-m* functionals the single-particle spectrum near the Fermi energy is sparse, so both lambda and E_2qp become more sensitive to level positions; the pairing rescaling f(x), calibrated on only 28 nuclei, may well leave a residual bias that tracks m*. If that is the case, the apparent threshold at 0.75 could be an artifact of the approximation rather than a real property of the functionals. The paper acknowledges the approximation but gives no estimate of its error or its correlation with the constrained parameters. A blocked HFB calculation for even-even parents, or at least a subset of nuclei, would be the natural check; without it, the central parameter window should be treated as a working hypothesis.

Who gets value: practitioners who need to pick a Skyrme functional for r-process or beta-decay simulations. They should read this as a map of which functionals tend to do well, not as a rigorous determination of nuclear matter properties. The paper is honest about its spherical-shape limitation and cites prior work fairly. I would send it to peer review because the question matters and the study is transparent, but I would ask for sensitivity analyses and an out-of-sample functional test before endorsing the conclusion.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies correlations between ground-state Q_beta values and nuclear bulk properties computed from 42 Skyrme energy-density functionals. The authors perform spherical Skyrme-Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov calculations for 215 even-even nuclei, compute Q_beta using the non-interacting quasiparticle approximation of Eq. (4), and compare with AME2020 Q_beta values through the mean difference (mu) and RMS deviation (gamma). They report Pearson correlation coefficients among gamma, mu, symmetry energy, effective mass, and other properties, then fit quadratic curves to gamma as a function of Esym for a subsample of functionals with effective mass above 0.75. This fitting yields an optimal symmetry energy at saturation density of J = 32.8 +/- 0.7 MeV, and the paper's central claim is that functionals with m*/m >= 0.75 and J near this value are most likely to systematically reproduce experimental Q_beta values. The abstract and Section IV additionally present the m*/m threshold as a criterion for functional selection.

Significance. If the central claim is correct, the paper offers a practical, easy-to-use criterion for pre-selecting Skyrme functionals for beta-decay calculations, which would be valuable given the proliferation of parametrizations. The manuscript is transparent about its method: it tabulates properties of all 42 functionals, clearly defines the approximate Q_beta expression, and acknowledges the spherical-symmetry limitation. The analysis is reproducible in principle, and the paper contributes a new observational constraint on the symmetry energy at low density, albeit with the important caveats described below. The study is exploratory and does not provide a derivation of the symmetry energy; rather, it identifies a region of parameter space favored by Q_beta data under specific modeling assumptions. Given the strong dependence of the conclusions on the unquantified approximation in Eq. (4) and on the statistical treatment, the paper needs major revision before the claim can be considered robust.

major comments (3)

[Section II, Eq. (4)]
[Section III.A and Section III.B]
[Section II (spherical assumption) and Section IV]

minor comments (6)

[Abstract]
[Fig. 5 caption]
[Table I]
[Section III.C]
[General]
[Section III.A]

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The optimal J and m* window is a fit to the same AME2020 Q_beta data used for validation; the in-sample selection of SkT1* makes the central claim a restatement of the fit.

fitted input called prediction [Section III.B (Mean symmetry energy), Eq. (13); conclusions in Section IV and Abstract]
""From the fitting, we obtain the minimum RMS value at Esym = 16.9±0.4 MeV at ρ = 0.34ρ0, Esym = 27.2±0.3 MeV at ρ = 0.76ρ0, Esym = 32.8±0.7 MeV at ρ = 1.00ρ0, and Esym = 40.4±6.5 MeV at ρ = 1.50ρ0." The abstract concludes: "...a symmetry energy of 32.8±0.7 MeV and effective mass of m*/m≥0.75 at the saturation density is the most likely to systematically reproduce the experimental data of Qβ.""

The quantity γ defined in Eq. (13) is the RMS deviation of the calculated Qβ from the experimental AME2020 values, and the "optimal Esym" is obtained by least-squares fitting γ versus Esym on exactly those same 215 experimental Qβ values. Therefore the statement that J=32.8±0.7 MeV and m*/m≥0.75 "most likely reproduce" the experimental Qβ is a restatement of the fit: the quoted parameters are, by construction, the minimum of the very deviation measure used as the reproduction criterion. This is a calibration on the dataset, not an independent prediction, and no out-of-sample or external Qβ benchmark is used.
fitted input called prediction [Section III.A, Section III.C, and Table I]
""In particular, SkT1* provides the lowest γ among the 42 functionals." Later: "These findings further support the conclusion that SkT1* is a promising choice for accurate Qβ predictions, reinforcing the importance of selecting functionals with appropriate symmetry energy and effective mass values.""

SkT1* is selected as the reference functional because Table I already shows it has the smallest γ, i.e., the closest agreement with the AME2020 Qβ data. Its subsequent "good agreement" with the data is therefore an in-sample consequence of the selection criterion, not an independent validation of the inferred Esym/m* window. The comparison with deliberately extreme functionals such as SK255 and Zσ illustrates the fitted trend but does not provide external evidence that the quoted parameter window is physically forced.

full rationale

The paper's computational setup is largely self-contained: Eq. (4) is a standard non-interacting quasiparticle approximation for Qβ, the Skyrme-HFB calculations are independent of the final conclusion, and the self-citations (e.g., Refs. [14-17]) are not load-bearing for the central claim. No uniqueness theorem or prior result by the same authors is used to forbid alternatives. However, the central quantitative claim is a fitting result. The RMS deviation γ of Eq. (13) is compared with the AME2020 Qβ data for 215 nuclei, then γ is least-squares fitted as a quadratic function of Esym, and the minimum of that fit is reported as the "most likely" symmetry energy for reproducing Qβ. Since the selected parameter window is exactly the minimizer of the same deviation statistic used to define reproduction accuracy, the headline conclusion reduces to a calibration statement: functionals near J=32.8 MeV with m*/m>0.75 have the smallest in-sample RMS deviation in this dataset. Similarly, SkT1* is chosen because it already has the lowest γ, so its agreement with data is in-sample. The paper honestly acknowledges the spherical-shape and quasiparticle approximations as limitations, and those are correctness risks rather than circularity. Overall, the derivation chain is not formally circular in its nuclear-structure input, but the headline prediction is statistically forced by the fitting procedure, warranting a partial circularity score of 6.

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

The central conclusion depends on several fitted or hand-chosen parameters: the pairing scaling (fitted to 28 nuclei), the parabolic fit for optimal Esym (fitted to the Q_beta data via gamma), and the effective mass threshold (hand-chosen). No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (6)

Pairing scaling factor f_n(x) = f_n = -0.4947 x + 1.7303
Fitted by least squares to reproduce empirical neutron pairing gaps from three-point mass differences of 19 nuclei (Eq. 8); enters Q_beta through E_2qp in Eq. (4).
Pairing scaling factor f_p(x) = f_p = -0.4401 x + 1.4792
Same as above for proton pairing gaps from 9 nuclei; depends linearly on effective mass.
Optimal symmetry energy Esym(1.00 rho0) = 32.8 ± 0.7 MeV
Central result: minimum of a quadratic fit to gamma versus Esym for 30 functionals with m*/m > 0.75 (Fig. 5c); it is a fit to the experimental Q_beta data, not an independent derivation.
Optimal Esym at other densities = 16.9±0.4 (0.34 rho0), 27.2±0.3 (0.76 rho0), 40.4±6.5 (1.50 rho0) MeV
Same quadratic-fitting procedure at different densities (Fig. 6); uncertainty grows with density.
Effective mass threshold = 0.75
Hand-chosen cutoff separating 'small' and 'large' effective mass groups; no sensitivity analysis is provided.
Q_beta data selection cut = >= 0.5 MeV
Nuclei with Q_beta below 0.5 MeV are excluded; selection rule is stated but its effect on the correlations is not discussed.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption Liquid-drop approximation for separation energies, Eq. (3): Sp(N,Z+1)-Sn(N,Z+1) ≈ 2 a_c Z/A^(1/3) - 4 a_sym I
Used to motivate why Q_beta should correlate with the symmetry energy coefficient; it is an approximate mass formula, not exact for finite nuclei.
domain assumption Non-interacting quasiparticle approximation for Q_beta, Eq. (4)
Q_beta is approximated as Delta M_nH - lambda_p + lambda_n - E_{2qp,lowest}, ignoring blocking and time-odd fields; load-bearing for all computed Q_beta values.
domain assumption Spherical symmetry for all 215 nuclei
Skyrme-HFB calculations assume spherical shapes; the paper acknowledges that many nuclei are deformed and results may change.
ad hoc to paper Linear dependence of pairing scaling on effective mass
Eq. (8) postulates f(x) linear in m*/m based on 28 calibration nuclei; if the true dependence is nonlinear or functional-dependent, the pairing gaps and Q_beta shift.
ad hoc to paper Quadratic relationship between gamma and Esym
The optimal Esym is extracted by fitting a parabola to the scatter of gamma versus Esym; the paper does not test other functional forms or provide goodness-of-fit statistics.
domain assumption The 42 functionals are a representative sample
The correlation analysis treats the functionals as a sample; in reality they are a curated set from the literature, which may bias the inferred optimum.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Correlations of $Q_{\beta}$-values with symmetry energy and effective mass studied within Skyrme energy--density functionals." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/B6B7TVD3

@misc{pith2026250510247,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Correlations of $Q_\beta$-values with symmetry energy and effective mass studied within Skyrme energy--density functionals},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/B6B7TVD3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.10247}
}

abstract

The $\beta$-decay half-lives of nuclei are sensitive to the values of $Q_{\beta}$. For accurate theoretical predictions, it is essential to develop an effective interaction or an energy density functional (EDF) that can systematically reproduce experimental $Q_{\beta}$ values. The challenge lies in identifying an appropriate EDF for an accurate $Q_{\beta}$ prediction. To address this, we focus on the bulk properties of nuclei that have correlations with $Q_{\beta}$. The primary objective of this study is to determine which nuclear bulk properties are sensitive to $Q_{\beta}$, providing information on the key nuclear characteristics that influence $\beta$-decay calculations. We employ the Skyrme energy-density functionals to find correlations between $Q_{\beta}$ and the nuclear bulk properties, assuming spherical symmetry. Using $42$ different Skyrme EDFs, we analyze these correlations by evaluating Pearson linear coefficients, focusing particularly on the relationship between $Q_{\beta}$ and various nuclear properties. We found that the symmetry energy at low densities shows a correlation with the $Q_{\beta}$ value. In particular, this correlation becomes stronger for functionals with an effective mass close to $1$. However, as the nuclear density increases, the correlation weakens. From our analysis, we found that a symmetry energy of $32.8\pm0.7$~MeV and effective mass of $m^{*}/m\ge0.75$ at the saturation density is the most likely to systematically reproduce the experimental data of $Q_{\beta}$ systematically.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.10247 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. Pearson linear correlation coefficients between the mean difference [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** , µ and the symmetry energy exhibit a positive correlation, indicating that smaller symmetry energies result [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (2 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. Mean difference ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7. ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

70 extracted references · 56 canonical work pages

[1]

Vautherin and D

D. Vautherin and D. M. Brink, Hartree-Fock Calculations with Skyrme’s Interaction. I. Spherical Nuclei, Phys. Rev. C 5, 626 (1972)

1972
[2]

Bender, P.-H

M. Bender, P.-H. Heenen, and P.-G. Reinhard, Self- consistent mean-field models for nuclear structure, Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, 121 (2003)

2003
[3]

P. Guo, X. Cao, K. Chen, Z. Chen, M.-K. Cheoun, et al., Nuclear mass table in deformed relativistic hartree- bogoliubov theory in continuum, ii: Even-z nuclei, Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables 158, 101661 (2024)

work page 2024
[4]

Grams, N

G. Grams, N. N. Shchechilin, A. S´ anchez-Fern´ andez, W. Ryssens, N. Chamel, and S. Goriely, Skyrme-hartree- fock-bogoliubov mass models on a 3d mesh: Iv. improved description of the isospin dependence of pairing, The Eu- ropean Physical Journal A 61, 10.1140/epja/s10050-025- 01503-x (2025)

doi:10.1140/epja/s10050-025- 2025
[5]

B. S. Hu, F. R. Xu, Z. H. Sun, J. P. Vary, and T. Li, Ab initio nuclear many-body perturbation calculations in the hartree-fock basis, Phys. Rev. C 94, 014303 (2016)

work page 2016
[6]

B. S. Hu, Q. Wu, Q. Yuan, Y. Z. Ma, X. Q. Yan, and F. R. Xu, Nuclear multipole responses from chiral effective field theory interactions, Phys. Rev. C 101, 044309 (2020)

work page 2020
[7]

M. S. S´ anchez, D. D. Dao, and L. Bonneau, Cutoff effects in hartree-fock calculations at leading order of chiral ef- fective field theory, Phys. Rev. C 107, 064307 (2023)

work page 2023
[8]

Nakada, Semi-realistic nucleon-nucleon interactions with improved neutron-matter properties, Phys

H. Nakada, Semi-realistic nucleon-nucleon interactions with improved neutron-matter properties, Phys. Rev. C 87, 014336 (2013)

work page 2013

Show all 70 references

[9]

Col` o, U

G. Col` o, U. Garg, and H. Sagawa, Symmetry energy from the nuclear collective motion: constraints from dipole, quadrupole, monopole and spin-dipole resonances, The European Physical Journal A 50, 10.1140/epja/i2014- 14026-9 (2014)

2014 doi
[10]

Inakura and H

T. Inakura and H. Nakada, Constraining the slope pa- rameter of the symmetry energy from nuclear structure, Phys. Rev. C 92, 064302 (2015)

2015
[11]

Margueron, R

J. Margueron, R. Hoffmann Casali, and F. Gulminelli, Equation of state for dense nucleonic matter from meta- modeling. ii. predictions for neutron star properties, 10 Phys. Rev. C 97, 025806 (2018)

2018
[12]

Roca-Maza and N

X. Roca-Maza and N. Paar, Nuclear equation of state from ground and collective excited state properties of nuclei, Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 101, 96 (2018)

2018
[13]

J. M. Lattimer, Constraints on the nuclear symmetry en- ergy from experiments, theory and observations, Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2536, 012009 (2023)

2023
[14]

K. Yoshida, Spin–isospin response of deformed neutron- rich nuclei in a self-consistent Skyrme energy-density- functional approach, PTEP 2013, 113D02 (2013), [Erra- tum: PTEP 2021, 019201 (2021)], arXiv:1308.0424 [nucl- th]

2013 arXiv
[15]

Minato, Z

F. Minato, Z. Niu, and H. Liang, Calculation of β-decay half-lives within a skyrme-hartree-fock-bogoliubov en- ergy density functional with the proton-neutron quasi- particle random-phase approximation and isoscalar pair- ing strengths optimized by a bayesian method, Phys. Rev...

2022
[16]

Yoshida, Y

K. Yoshida, Y. Niu, and F. Minato, β-decay half-lives as an indicator of shape-phase transition in neutron-rich zr isotopes with particle-vibration coupling effects, Phys. Rev. C 108, 034305 (2023)

2023
[17]

Y. F. Niu, G. Col` o, M. Brenna, P. F. Bortignon, and J. Meng, Gamow-teller response within skyrme random- phase approximation plus particle-vibration coupling, Phys. Rev. C 85, 034314 (2012)

2012
[18]

Bender and P.-H

M. Bender and P.-H. Heenen, Configuration mixing of angular-momentum and particle-number projected triax- ial hartree-fock-bogoliubov states using the skyrme en- ergy density functional, Phys. Rev. C 78, 024309 (2008)

2008
[19]

E. M. Burbidge, G. R. Burbidge, W. A. Fowler, and F. Hoyle, Synthesis of the elements in stars, Rev. Mod. Phys. 29, 547 (1957)

1957
[20]

A. G. W. Cameron, Nuclear reactions in stars and nucle- ogenesis, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 69, 201 (1957)

1957
[21]

Kajino, W

T. Kajino, W. Aoki, A. Balantekin, R. Diehl, M. Fami- ano, and G. Mathews, Current status of r-process nucle- osynthesis, Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics107, 109 (2019)

2019
[22]

J. J. Cowan, C. Sneden, J. E. Lawler, A. Aprahamian, M. Wiescher, K. Langanke, G. Mart´ ınez-Pinedo, and F.- K. Thielemann, Origin of the heaviest elements: The rapid neutron-capture process, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 015002 (2021)

2021
[23]

Ni and Z

D. Ni and Z. Ren, β−decay rates of neutron-rich zr and mo isotopes in the deformed quasiparticle random-phase approximation with realistic interactions, Phys. Rev. C 89, 064320 (2014)

2014
[24]

Yoshida, Low-Lying Gamow-Teller Excitations and Beta-Decay Properties of Neutron-Rich Even- N Zr Isotopes, JPS

K. Yoshida, Low-Lying Gamow-Teller Excitations and Beta-Decay Properties of Neutron-Rich Even- N Zr Isotopes, JPS. Conf. Proc. 6, 020017 (2015), https://journals.jps.jp/doi/pdf/10.7566/JPSCP.6.020017

2015 doi
[25]

Y. F. Niu, Z. M. Niu, G. Col` o, and E. Vigezzi, Particle- vibration coupling effect on the β decay of magic nuclei, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 142501 (2015)

2015
[26]

Z. Y. Wang, Y. F. Niu, Z. M. Niu, and J. Y. Guo, Nuclear β-decay half-lives in the relativistic point-coupling model, Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics 43, 045108 (2016)

2016
[27]

Sarriguren, Beta-decay properties of neutron-rich medium-mass nuclei, Journal of Physics: Conference Se- ries 724, 012044 (2016)

P. Sarriguren, Beta-decay properties of neutron-rich medium-mass nuclei, Journal of Physics: Conference Se- ries 724, 012044 (2016)

2016
[28]

Marketin, L

T. Marketin, L. Huther, and G. Martinez-Pinedo, Phys. Rev. C 93 (2016)

2016
[29]

Suzuki, S

T. Suzuki, S. Shibagaki, T. Yoshida, T. Kajino, and T. Otsuka, β-decay rates for exotic nuclei and r-process nucleosynthesis up to thorium and uranium, The Astro- physical Journal 859, 133 (2018)

2018
[30]

Yoshida, Suddenly shortened half-lives beyond 78Ni : N = 50 magic number and high-energy nonunique first- forbidden transitions, Phys

K. Yoshida, Suddenly shortened half-lives beyond 78Ni : N = 50 magic number and high-energy nonunique first- forbidden transitions, Phys. Rev. C 100, 024316 (2019)

2019
[31]

E. M. Ney, J. Engel, T. Li, and N. Schunck, Global de- scription of β− decay with the axially deformed skyrme finite-amplitude method: Extension to odd-mass and odd-odd nuclei, Phys. Rev. C 102, 034326 (2020)

2020
[32]

I. N. Borzov, Global calculations of beta-decay properties based on the fayans functional, Physics of Atomic Nuclei 83, 700 (2020)

2020
[33]

Nomura, R

K. Nomura, R. Rodr´ ıguez-Guzm´ an, and L. M. Robledo,β decay of even-a nuclei within the interacting boson model with input based on nuclear density functional theory, Phys. Rev. C 101, 044318 (2020)

2020
[34]

Van Giai and H

N. Van Giai and H. Sagawa, Spin-isospin and pairing properties of modified skyrme interactions, Physics Let- ters B 106, 379 (1981)

1981
[35]

Bender, J

M. Bender, J. Dobaczewski, J. Engel, and W. Nazarewicz, Gamow-teller strength and the spin- isospin coupling constants of the skyrme energy functional, Phys. Rev. C 65, 054322 (2002)

2002
[36]

Chabanat, P

E. Chabanat, P. Bonche, P. Haensel, J. Meyer, and R. Schaeffer, A skyrme parametrization from subnuclear to neutron star densities part ii. nuclei far from stabili- ties, Nuclear Physics A 635, 231 (1998)

1998
[37]

Reinhard, D

P.-G. Reinhard, D. J. Dean, W. Nazarewicz, J. Dobaczewski, J. A. Maruhn, and M. R. Strayer, Shape coexistence and the effective nucleon-nucleon interaction, Phys. Rev. C 60, 014316 (1999)

1999
[38]

N. Wang, L. Ou, and M. Liu, Nuclear symmetry energy from the fermi-energy difference in nuclei, Phys. Rev. C 87, 034327 (2013)

2013
[39]

J. Dong, H. Zhang, L. Wang, and W. Zuo, Density de- pendence of the symmetry energy probed by β−-decay energies of odd-a nuclei, Phys. Rev. C 88, 014302 (2013)

2013
[40]

Huang, M

W. Huang, M. Wang, F. Kondev, G. Audi, and S. Naimi, The ame 2020 atomic mass evaluation (i). evaluation of input data, and adjustment procedures, Chinese Physics C 45, 030002 (2021)

2021
[41]

Kasuya and K

H. Kasuya and K. Yoshida, Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov theory for odd-mass nuclei with a time-odd con- straint and application to deformed halo nuclei, Progress of Theoretical and Experimental Physics 2021, 013D01 (2020), https://academic.oup.com/ptep/article- pdf/2021/1/013D01/361...

2020
[42]

PearsonAll.out

Most of these functionals are those recommended in Ref. [43], covering a wide range of characteristics of Skryme forces. In addition to these, we have added the SkP functional [44] and several modern functionals, namely SAMi [45], KIDS [46, 47], and UNEDF [48, 49]. For the pai...
[43]

Engel, M

J. Engel, M. Bender, J. Dobaczewski, W. Nazarewicz, and R. Surman, β decay rates of r-process waiting-point nuclei in a self-consistent approach, Phys. Rev. C 60, 014302 (1999)

1999
[44]

Bonasera, M

G. Bonasera, M. R. Anders, and S. Shlomo, Giant res- onances in 40,48Ca,68 Ni,90 Zr,116 Sn,144 Sm, and 208Pb, Phys. Rev. C 98, 054316 (2018)

2018
[45]

Dobaczewski and J

J. Dobaczewski and J. Dudek, Time-odd components in the mean field of rotating superdeformed nuclei, Phys. Rev. C 52, 1827 (1995)

1995
[46]

Roca-Maza, G

X. Roca-Maza, G. Col` o, and H. Sagawa, New skyrme interaction with improved spin-isospin properties, Phys. Rev. C 86, 031306 (2012). 11

2012
[47]

H. Gil, P. Papakonstantinou, C. H. Hyun, and Y. Oh, From homogeneous matter to finite nuclei: Role of the effective mass, Phys. Rev. C 99, 064319 (2019)

2019
[48]

H. Gil, C. H. Hyun, and K. Kim, Quasielastic electron scattering with the kids nuclear energy density func- tional, Phys. Rev. C 104, 044613 (2021)

2021
[49]

Kortelainen, T

M. Kortelainen, T. Lesinski, J. Mor´ e, W. Nazarewicz, J. Sarich, N. Schunck, M. V. Stoitsov, and S. Wild, Nuclear energy density optimization, Phys. Rev. C 82, 024313 (2010)

2010
[50]

Kortelainen, J

M. Kortelainen, J. McDonnell, W. Nazarewicz, P.-G. Reinhard, J. Sarich, N. Schunck, M. V. Stoitsov, and S. M. Wild, Nuclear energy density optimization: Large deformations, Phys. Rev. C 85, 024304 (2012)

2012
[51]

Berger, M

J. Berger, M. Girod, and D. Gogny, Microscopic analy- sis of collective dynamics in low energy fission, Nuclear Physics A 428, 23 (1984)

1984
[52]

Ring and P

P. Ring and P. Schuck, The Nuclear Many-Body Problem (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1980)

1980
[53]

Satu la, J

W. Satu la, J. Dobaczewski, and W. Nazarewicz, Odd- even staggering of nuclear masses: Pairing or shape ef- fect?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 3599 (1998)

1998
[54]

Yamagami, Y

M. Yamagami, Y. R. Shimizu, and T. Nakatsukasa, Op- timal pair density functional for the description of nu- clei with large neutron excess, Phys. Rev. C 80, 064301 (2009)

2009
[55]

Gonzalez-Llarena, J

T. Gonzalez-Llarena, J. Egido, G. Lalazissis, and P. Ring, Relativistic hartree-bogoliubov calculations with finite range pairing forces, Physics Letters B 379, 13 (1996)

1996
[56]

Vretenar, A

D. Vretenar, A. Afanasjev, G. Lalazissis, and P. Ring, Relativistic hartree-bogoliubov theory: static and dy- namic aspects of exotic nuclear structure, Physics Re- ports 409, 101 (2005)

2005
[57]

Bartel, P

J. Bartel, P. Quentin, M. Brack, C. Guet, and H.-B. H˚ akansson, Towards a better parametrisation of skyrme- like effective forces: A critical study of the skm force, Nuclear Physics A 386, 79 (1982)

1982
[58]

Bennour, P.-H

L. Bennour, P.-H. Heenen, P. Bonche, J. Dobaczewski, and H. Flocard, Charge distributions of 208Pb, 206Pb, and 205Tl and the mean-field approximation, Phys. Rev. C 40, 2834 (1989)

1989
[59]

L. G. Cao, U. Lombardo, C. W. Shen, and N. V. Giai, From brueckner approach to skyrme-type energy density functional, Phys. Rev. C 73, 014313 (2006)

2006
[60]

Tondeur, M

F. Tondeur, M. Brack, M. Farine, and J. Pearson, Static nuclear properties and the parametrisation of skyrme forces, Nuclear Physics A 420, 297 (1984)

1984
[61]

Reinhard and H

P.-G. Reinhard and H. Flocard, Nuclear effective forces and isotope shifts, Nuclear Physics A 584, 467 (1995)

1995
[62]

Kl¨ upfel, P.-G

P. Kl¨ upfel, P.-G. Reinhard, T. J. B¨ urvenich, and J. A. Maruhn, Variations on a theme by skyrme: A systematic study of adjustments of model parameters, Phys. Rev. C 79, 034310 (2009)

2009
[63]

Lyutorovich, V

N. Lyutorovich, V. I. Tselyaev, J. Speth, S. Krewald, F. Gr¨ ummer, and P.-G. Reinhard, Self-consistent calcu- lations of the electric giant dipole resonances in light and heavy nuclei, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 092502 (2012)

2012
[64]

Steiner, M

A. Steiner, M. Prakash, J. Lattimer, and P. Ellis, Isospin asymmetry in nuclei and neutron stars, Physics Reports 411, 325 (2005)

2005
[65]

Friedrich and P.-G

J. Friedrich and P.-G. Reinhard, Skyrme-force parametrization: Least-squares fit to nuclear ground- state properties, Phys. Rev. C 33, 335 (1986)

1986
[66]

Guichon, H

P. Guichon, H. Matevosyan, N. Sandulescu, and A. Thomas, Physical origin of density dependent forces of skyrme type within the quark meson coupling model, Nuclear Physics A 772, 1 (2006)

2006
[67]

B. K. Agrawal, S. Shlomo, and V. K. Au, Determination of the parameters of a skyrme type effective interaction using the simulated annealing approach, Phys. Rev. C 72, 014310 (2005)

2005
[68]

B. K. Agrawal, S. Shlomo, and V. Kim Au, Nuclear mat- ter incompressibility coefficient in relativistic and non- relativistic microscopic models, Phys. Rev. C 68, 031304 (2003)

2003
[69]

L.-W. Chen, C. M. Ko, B.-A. Li, and J. Xu, Density slope of the nuclear symmetry energy from the neutron skin thickness of heavy nuclei, Phys. Rev. C 82, 024321 (2010)

2010
[70]

B. A. Brown, G. Shen, G. C. Hillhouse, J. Meng, and A. Trzci´ nska, Neutron skin deduced from antiprotonic atom data, Phys. Rev. C 76, 034305 (2007)

2007

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

Vautherin and D

D. Vautherin and D. M. Brink, Hartree-Fock Calculations with Skyrme’s Interaction. I. Spherical Nuclei, Phys. Rev. C 5, 626 (1972)

1972

[2] [2]

Bender, P.-H

M. Bender, P.-H. Heenen, and P.-G. Reinhard, Self- consistent mean-field models for nuclear structure, Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, 121 (2003)

2003

[3] [3]

P. Guo, X. Cao, K. Chen, Z. Chen, M.-K. Cheoun, et al., Nuclear mass table in deformed relativistic hartree- bogoliubov theory in continuum, ii: Even-z nuclei, Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables 158, 101661 (2024)

work page 2024

[4] [4]

Grams, N

G. Grams, N. N. Shchechilin, A. S´ anchez-Fern´ andez, W. Ryssens, N. Chamel, and S. Goriely, Skyrme-hartree- fock-bogoliubov mass models on a 3d mesh: Iv. improved description of the isospin dependence of pairing, The Eu- ropean Physical Journal A 61, 10.1140/epja/s10050-025- 01503-x (2025)

doi:10.1140/epja/s10050-025- 2025

[5] [5]

B. S. Hu, F. R. Xu, Z. H. Sun, J. P. Vary, and T. Li, Ab initio nuclear many-body perturbation calculations in the hartree-fock basis, Phys. Rev. C 94, 014303 (2016)

work page 2016

[6] [6]

B. S. Hu, Q. Wu, Q. Yuan, Y. Z. Ma, X. Q. Yan, and F. R. Xu, Nuclear multipole responses from chiral effective field theory interactions, Phys. Rev. C 101, 044309 (2020)

work page 2020

[7] [7]

M. S. S´ anchez, D. D. Dao, and L. Bonneau, Cutoff effects in hartree-fock calculations at leading order of chiral ef- fective field theory, Phys. Rev. C 107, 064307 (2023)

work page 2023

[8] [8]

Nakada, Semi-realistic nucleon-nucleon interactions with improved neutron-matter properties, Phys

H. Nakada, Semi-realistic nucleon-nucleon interactions with improved neutron-matter properties, Phys. Rev. C 87, 014336 (2013)

work page 2013