Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 84 references

The Electron-Gamma Coincidence Setup DAGOBERT

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read DAGOBERT@QCLAM establishes that electron-gamma coincidence spectroscopy works for medium-heavy and heavy nuclei, demonstrated with the first (e,e'gamma) measurement on 96Ru up to 15 MeV.

desk verdict A genuinely new (e,e'gamma) capability, well documented and worth refereeing, but the bremsstrahlung subtraction omits the paper's own interference term and the angular distribution lacks error bars. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.02072 v1 pith:RFFBLE64 submitted 2025-06-02 physics.ins-det nucl-ex

B. Hesbacher , G. Steinhilber , J. Isaak , N. Pietralla , J. Birkhan , M. L. Cortés , D. H. Jakubassa-Amundsen , I. Jurosevic
show 4 more authors
P. von Neumann-Cosel M. Rech X. Roca-Maza D. Schneider
This is my paper
classification physics.ins-detnucl-ex
keywords ExclusiveelectronscatteringElectron-gammacoincidenceBremsstrahlungAngulardistributionNeutronevaporationLaBr3:CedetectorsQCLAMspectrometerMixed-symmetrystates
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

The paper claims that DAGOBERT@QCLAM, a new electron-gamma coincidence setup built around a large-acceptance magnetic spectrometer and six fast LaBr$_3$:Ce detectors, is a worldwide unique instrument that brings $(e,e'\gamma)$ nuclear spectroscopy to medium-heavy and heavy nuclei. The demonstration is the first such experiment on a nucleus with mass number 90 or larger: $^{96}\mathrm{Ru}$, measured up to 15 MeV excitation energy at an electron beam energy of 85 MeV. From those data the paper extracts the angular distribution of the $2_1^+\to0_1^+$ transition and the gamma-decay branching ratios of the mixed-symmetric $2_3^+$ state, and it develops two independent methods to subtract the indistinguishable coincident-bremsstrahlung background. The $2_1^+$ angular distribution matches standard theoretical predictions, and the $2_3^+$ branching ratios agree with literature values, which is what makes the setup trustworthy for future structure studies. If the claim is right, electron-gamma coincidence experiments become feasible for virtually all stable nuclei, not only the light nuclei accessible in the pioneering measurements.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the coincidence setup itself, named DAGOBERT@QCLAM. QCLAM is a large-acceptance magnetic spectrometer (35 msr solid angle, $\pm10\%$ momentum acceptance, $10^{-4}$ relative energy resolution) that momentum-analyzes the scattered electron; DAGOBERT is an array of six $3\times3$ inch LaBr$_3$:Ce scintillators with 0.7 ns intrinsic timing, 2.9% energy resolution at 662 keV, and 0.61% total photopeak efficiency at 1.33 MeV, mounted at backward angles to suppress the forward bremsstrahlung cone. The figure of merit that carries the sensitivity claim is the electro-photo production coincidence resolution $R = (E_i/\Delta E_x)(E_\gamma/\Delta E_\gamma)/\Gamma(T_{\mathrm{coin}})$, the product of electron and photon energy resolutions per coincidence-time resolution; after time-of-flight and amplitude-dependent trigger corrections the coincidence time resolution reaches 1.9 ns FWHM. Two background-subtraction mechanisms carry the physics results: a simulation method that combines a Monte Carlo detector response with the Bethe-Heitler formula (the standard quantum-electrodynamic bremsstrahlung cross section) scaled to the data, and a measurement method that takes background gates above and below an isolated state and averages them. The angular-distribution analysis compares the $2_1^+$ decay with PWBA and with a DWBA calculation that includes Coulomb distortion, giving the theoretical curves the data are tested against.

What would settle it

Take the same $^{96}\mathrm{Ru}$ target at a second beam energy or spectrometer angle and compare the extracted $2_1^+$ angular distribution and $2_3^+$ branching ratios with the first measurement; both PWBA and DWBA predict a specific kinematic dependence of the nuclear contribution and a different suppression of bremsstrahlung, so a systematic shift between kinematical settings would show that the background subtraction is biasing the results.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that high-resolution electron-gamma coincidence measurements are no longer confined to light nuclei. Combining the QCLAM spectrometer with the DAGOBERT array yields an electro-photo production coincidence resolution of $R = 32.3\ \mathrm{ps}^{-1}$, roughly 60 times the value of the pioneering $^{12}\mathrm{C}$ experiment, and a two-to-three orders of magnitude higher sensitivity to electro-photo production reactions. In the first $A\ge90$ case, $^{96}\mathrm{Ru}(e,e'\gamma)$ at 85 MeV and a scattering angle of 46.3 degrees, the setup resolves eleven excited states below 5.5 MeV, reproduces the predicted quadrupole angular distribution of the $2_1^+$ state, and extracts $2_3^+\to0_1^+$ and $2_3^+\to2_1^+$ branching ratios ($6.1^{+1.1}_{-6.1}\%$ by the simulation method, $6.0^{+2.0}_{-6.0}\%$ by the measurement method, and $90(11)\%$ / $90(10)\%$ for the $2_1^+$ branch) that are compatible with literature. Above the neutron separation threshold, the same matrix shows $\gamma$ decay of $^{95}\mathrm{Ru}$ following $(e,e'n)$, including a 1141 keV transition observed for the first time. The paper concludes that the setup is ready for science production, targeting dipole response and giant-resonance studies.

Load-bearing premise

The results stand on the assumption that the coincident-bremsstrahlung background is correctly described by the subtraction procedures -- the simulation method after the computed Bethe-Heitler matrix is scaled to the data, and the measurement method on the assumption that the background gates beside an isolated state contain no ground-state decays of other excited states.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The $(e,e'\gamma)$ reaction can now be used on medium-heavy and heavy stable nuclei; the $^{96}\mathrm{Ru}$ run is the first such experiment for $A\ge90$ and covers excitation energies up to 15 MeV.
  • Measured gamma-ray angular distributions can be compared with PWBA and DWBA calculations to test the interference between longitudinal and transverse form factors, as demonstrated for the $2_1^+$ state.
  • Branching ratios of weakly populated off-yrast states, such as the mixed-symmetric $2_3^+$ state, can be extracted with either of the two bremsstrahlung-subtraction methods.
  • Above the neutron separation threshold, $(e,e'n\gamma)$ data become accessible; three low-lying transitions in $^{95}\mathrm{Ru}$ were resolved, including the 1141 keV transition seen for the first time.
  • Planned applications follow directly: studies of the low-energy dipole response and the Pygmy Dipole Resonance, separation of $M1$ and $E1$ strength, and energy-resolved neutron-decay branches of the Isovector Giant Dipole Resonance.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the two bremsstrahlung-subtraction methods rest on different assumptions, their agreement on the $2_3^+$ branching ratios is a useful internal check; applying both to states with precisely known ground-state branches would quantify how much of the quoted uncertainty comes from the background model rather than from counting statistics.
  • The coincidence condition suppresses the radiative tail, so the same data set could be re-analyzed to map gamma-decay strength versus excitation energy above the neutron threshold, turning the $(e,e'n\gamma)$ events into a decay-strength distribution rather than three resolved lines.
  • If the sensitivity transfers to other targets, $(e,e'\gamma)$ experiments on isotopically enriched or otherwise rare stable nuclei become plausible, and the measured rotation of the angular distribution could serve as a longitudinal-transverse form-factor separation for those nuclei.
  • The angular-distribution comparison is made in arbitrary units, so the shape is tested but not the absolute cross section; an absolute measurement, possible with the known target thickness and beam current, would probe the intensity predictions of PWBA/DWBA and the overall normalization of the background subtraction.
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 describes the construction, commissioning, and first physics results of DAGOBERT, a LaBr3:Ce gamma-ray detector array coupled to the QCLAM electron spectrometer at the S-DALINAC. It reports the first (e,e'gamma) experiment on a nucleus with A>=90, namely 96Ru, up to 15 MeV excitation energy. The measured quantities are the angular distribution of the 2_1^+ -> 0_1^+ transition and the gamma-decay branching ratios of the mixed-symmetric 2_3^+ state, together with a first observation of gamma decays in 95Ru populated via (e,e'n gamma). The paper also introduces two methods for subtracting the coincident bremsstrahlung background and quantifies the performance gain via the figure of merit R, which is improved by a factor of about 60 compared to the pioneering Illinois setup.

Significance. If the physics results are reliable, the paper is significant for nuclear structure and for the development of exclusive electron-scattering capabilities. It demonstrates that (e,e'gamma) experiments can be extended to medium-heavy and heavy nuclei, opening the possibility of studying off-yrast states, mixed-symmetry states, and the decay of the pygmy dipole resonance with purely electromagnetic probes. The instrumentation is characterized in detail, including calibrations, timing resolution, and efficiency, and the processed data are made openly available. The paper also has a strength in that the branching ratios are compared with, rather than fitted to, literature values. However, the physics results are more modest than the abstract suggests: the 2_3^+ -> 0_1^+ branch is only an upper limit, and the angular distribution is presented without error bars. The main concern is the treatment of the coherent interference term in the background subtraction, which could bias the extracted branching ratios and the angular distribution.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 6.6 and Eq. (3)] Eq. (3) states that the total (e,e'gamma) cross section is sigma_nucl + sigma_brems + sigma_inter, with a coherent interference term. The two background subtraction methods in Sec. 6.6.1 and 6.6.2 remove only the incoherent Bethe-Heitler contribution. The simulated matrix in Sec. 6.6.1 is built from Eq. (9) and therefore contains no sigma_inter, while the background gates in Sec. 6.6.2 are placed off resonance, where the nuclear amplitude is suppressed and sigma_inter is negligible. Consequently, the on-resonance residual after subtraction contains sigma_nucl + sigma_inter, not sigma_nucl alone. Since sigma_inter can be as large as 2 sqrt(sigma_nucl sigma_brems) and V_I is proportional to sin(theta)cos(Phi) (Eq. A.4), it is not suppressed at the detector angles used here. For the weak 2_3^+ -> 0_1^+ branch, whose literature branching ratio is only 6.7(8)%, this can produce a relative bias far larger than the quoted uncertainties in Table 7. The same issue affects the 2_1^+ angular distribution in Sec. 7.2: the data have been corrected for sigma_brems only, while the DWBA curve in Eq. (22) includes the full coherent sum sigma_nucl + sigma_brems + sigma_inter. The authors should either include sigma_inter in the background subtraction, perform a coherent fit of the full cross section to the data, or at minimum quantify the size of sigma_inter with the available DWBA formalism and add it as a systematic uncertainty.
  2. [Sec. 7.2, Fig. 22] The angular distribution of the 2_1^+ -> 0_1^+ decay is presented without any error bars on the six data points, and the data are normalized to the PWBA maximum in arbitrary units. The text claims 'excellent agreement' with PWBA and DWBA, but no chi-square, number of degrees of freedom, or normalization uncertainty is given. In addition, the figure mixes data that have been corrected for incoherent bremsstrahlung with DWBA curves that include coherent bremsstrahlung and interference, so the comparison is not well defined. The authors should specify the exact correction applied to the data, provide statistical and systematic point-by-point uncertainties, and give a quantitative measure of the agreement, ideally with a fit including the interference term.
  3. [Table 7 and Sec. 7.4] The 2_3^+ -> 0_1^+ branching ratio is reported as 6.1 +1.1/-6.1 and 6.0 +2.0/-6.0 from the two subtraction methods, with the error bars extending to zero. The text in Sec. 7.4 correctly states that only an upper limit can be determined, and the figure shows no clear ground-state peak. However, the abstract and Highlights say that the 'gamma-decay branching ratios of the mixed-symmetric 2_3^+ state were observed', and Table 7 presents these values as central results. This is an overstatement: for the weak branch, only an upper limit is available, and the central values are essentially unconstrained. The authors should clearly mark the 2_3^+ -> 0_1^+ entries as upper limits and adjust the wording of the abstract and Highlights accordingly.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 6.6.1] The description of the simulation-based subtraction does not state how the scale factor applied to the simulated bremsstrahlung matrix is determined, which regions of the data are used for the scaling, or how the statistical and systematic uncertainties of this scaling are propagated into the final spectra. This information is needed for reproducibility and for assessing the reliability of the method.
  2. [Sec. 6.2.1 and Eq. (15)] In the text following Eq. (15), the fit parameters are listed as a, b, c, d, and f, but Eq. (15) contains the parameters c, d, e, and f. The variable e is missing from the list, and the sentence should be corrected.
  3. [Sec. 7.2, Fig. 23] The conversion between the PWBA angles (theta, Phi) of Fig. 2 and the DWBA angles (theta_k, phi_k) is given in Eqs. (24) and (25), but the figure caption does not clearly state which angle convention the plotted experimental data use. This makes it unnecessarily difficult to compare the two presentations of the same data.
  4. [Entire manuscript] The paper would benefit from a short table or appendix listing the main systematic uncertainties in the extracted branching ratios and the angular distribution, separate from the statistical uncertainties. Currently, the quoted errors in Table 7 appear to be statistical only, and the text does not discuss systematic contributions from the background subtraction, the relative efficiency, or the normalization.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the setup performance, angular distribution, and branching ratios are extracted from data and compared with external literature and theory, not derived from the paper's own assumptions.

full rationale

The paper's central claims—worldwide-unique setup, first (e,e'gamma) measurement of an A>=90 nucleus, and the measured 2+1 angular distribution and 2+3 branching ratios—are supported by directly measured resolutions, calibrated spectra, and coincidence data. The bremsstrahlung background subtraction uses a Bethe-Heitler PWBA simulation scaled to the data and an experiment-based gate method; neither method fits the extracted physics quantities (branching ratios or angular distribution shape) to the literature or to the nuclear PWBA/DWBA calculations. The angular distribution is explicitly normalized to PWBA, so only the shape is compared, a disclosed convention rather than a forced prediction. The 2+3 branching ratios are compared with independent (p,p'gamma) literature values [62] and are shown to be compatible, which is a validation against external data. Although Refs. [43], [52], [62], and [64] involve overlapping authors, they are separate published measurements or theoretical calculations with stated assumptions and do not constitute a self-citation chain that forces the present results. The possible omission of the coherent interference term sigma_inter in the background subtraction (Eq. 3 vs. Sec. 6.6) is a correctness concern about the background model, not a circular reduction of the derivation to its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 8 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central capability claim rests mainly on calibration and background-subtraction assumptions. Most free parameters are ordinary detector calibrations, but the bremsstrahlung subtraction scale and the empirical rate formula for detector 2 are notable because they are fitted to the same data they help correct. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (8)
  • Bremsstrahlung simulation scale factor = not quoted (global normalization)
    In Sec. 6.6.1 the simulated bremsstrahlung Ex-Egamma matrix is scaled to the measured data before subtraction; the scale is a free normalization fitted to the data.
  • 197Au peak background polynomial coefficients = not quoted
    In Sec. 6.6.2 a second-order polynomial is fitted underneath the 197Au gamma peak and subtracted; coefficients are free fit parameters.
  • QCLAM energy calibration coefficients a, b, c = a=10.1(15) keV offset, slope 1.0013(13), c not stated
    Eq. (13) uses a second-order polynomial fitted to 12C elastic, 2+1 and Hoyle peaks; after transfer to 96Ru, a first-order recalibration was applied (Sec. 7.1).
  • QCLAM aberration correction polynomial coefficients a_ij = not quoted
    Eqs. (11)-(12) are fitted to elastic 96Ru lines at 11 magnetic field settings to straighten the focal plane (Sec. 6.1.1).
  • LaBr3 rate-correction parameters a,b,c,d,e,f = Table 4
    Eqs. (14)-(15) are fitted to 60Co peak positions at varying count rates for each detector (Sec. 6.2.1); detector 2 uses an ad hoc empirical formula.
  • Electron line-shape parameters sigma1, sigma2, eta, delta = 36.7(4) keV, 49.7(5) keV, 1.36(2), 1.77(8)
    Eq. (19) is fitted to identifiable peaks in the 96Ru electron energy spectrum and used for excitation energies and peak counts (Sec. 7.1, Table 5).
  • Time-of-flight and time-walk correction coefficients = not quoted
    Eqs. (17)-(18) and the quadratic fit to the prompt peak versus E_gamma are fitted to coincidence data (Sec. 6.3).
  • Relative efficiency normalization = not quoted
    The white-spectrum x-phi data are normalized to the total number of events to define the relative efficiency of QCLAM (Sec. 6.1.3).
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption One-photon exchange dominates electron-nucleus scattering at these momentum transfers
    Sec. 2.1 states multiple scattering can be neglected for momentum transfers relevant here, citing [21]; the PWBA/DWBA analyses depend on it.
  • domain assumption Bethe-Heitler formula with a ground-state charge form factor reduction describes the coincident bremsstrahlung background
    Eq. (9) and Sec. 6.6.1 use this PWBA calculation to generate the simulated bremsstrahlung matrix.
  • domain assumption The DWBA theory of Ref. [64] is valid for 96Ru(e,e'gamma)
    Sec. 7.2 compares the measured angular distribution to DWBA calculations based on that theory; Coulomb distortion is non-negligible for Z=44.
  • domain assumption Skyrme SkP HF+RPA transition densities provide realistic nuclear structure input
    Sec. 7.2 obtains transition densities from HF+RPA with SkP; the comparison's agreement is conditional on these densities.
  • domain assumption Known level scheme and branching ratios from literature [62] are correct
    Sec. 7.1 and 7.4 rely on literature excitation energies and branching ratios for identifying states and validating subtraction methods.
  • domain assumption GEANT4 detector response simulation is reliable for the LaBr3 detectors
    Sec. 6.6.1 uses GEANT4 to generate the detector response of isotropic photons.
  • ad hoc to paper Empirical rate-correction formula for detector 2 (Eq. 15) is valid
    Sec. 6.2.1 notes detector 2 deviates from Eq. (14) and introduces an ad hoc empirical function with five fit parameters.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Electron-Gamma Coincidence Setup DAGOBERT." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RFFBLE64

@misc{pith2026250602072,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Electron-Gamma Coincidence Setup DAGOBERT},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RFFBLE64}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.02072}
}
abstract

The QCLAM electron spectrometer at the S-DALINAC electron accelerator at Technische Universit\"at Darmstadt has been extended by the DAGOBERT $\gamma$-detector array consisting of fast timing and high efficiency LaBr$_3$:Ce detectors to perform electron-gamma coincidence measurements. The functionality of the setup and data acquisition system was demonstrated in a commissioning measurement on $^{12}\textrm{C}$ observing the $4.44\,$MeV and $15.11\,$MeV states. A medium-heavy nucleus, $^{96}\textrm{Ru}$, has been studied for the first time up to excitation energies of $15\,$MeV using the $(e,e'\gamma)$ reaction. In particular, the angular distribution of the $2_1^+$ state and the $\gamma$-decay branching ratios of the mixed-symmetric $2_3^+$ state were observed. DAGOBERT@QCLAM is a new and worldwide unique setup for nuclear structure studies of excitation and decay using purely electromagnetic probes, with a significantly improved sensitivity compared to previous experiments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.02072 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Feynman diagrams of the (𝑒, 𝑒′ 𝛾) reaction. In inelastic electron scattering, a nucleus is excited from an initial state 𝐽 𝜋 𝑖 to a state 𝐽 𝜋 𝑚 (Fig. 1a). By the emission of 𝛾 radiation, the nucleus decays into a state 𝐽 𝜋 𝑓 with a lower excitation energy. In the case of a direct decay to the ground state, the energy of the emitted photon 𝐸𝛾0 = 𝐸𝑥 corresponds to the energy loss of the electron during inelastic scatt… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The relevant vectors and angles of the kinematics of an (𝑒, 𝑒′ 𝛾) reaction are shown. The scattering plane is defined by the vectors ⃗𝑝𝑖 and ⃗𝑝𝑓 . The coordinate system is chosen such that the scattering plane coincides with the 𝑥-𝑧-plane and the 𝑧-axis is defined by the momentum transfer ⃗𝑞 = ⃗𝑝𝑖−⃗𝑝𝑓 . The vectors of momentum transfer ⃗𝑞 and momentum of the emitted photon 𝑘⃗ define the reaction plane. This coordina… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Double differential cross section of nuclear decay and bremsstrahlung contributions to the (𝑒, 𝑒′ 𝛾) reaction in the 𝑥-𝑧 plane for the 2 + 1 state of 96Ru and 𝐸𝑖 = 85 MeV. Positions of the 𝛾 detectors in the experiment are shown as red rectangles. The peak marked with (a) represents the maximum of the bremsstrahlung cone in direction of the incoming electron beam and the peak marked with (b) the corresponding maximu… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (22 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The S-DALINAC [17] consisting of thermionic gun, injector and main accelerator (LINAC). The recirculations enable higher electron energies. Various experimental stations exist: DHIPS [32], COBRA [33], NEPTUN [34], QCLAM [35, 36] and LINTOTT [37, 38] spectrometer. For e…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Overview of the new (𝑒, 𝑒′ 𝛾) setup. ○1 : Beam focusing elements, ○2 : scattering chamber, ○3 : DAGOBERT, ○4 : QCLAM spectrometer, ○5 : magnetic field shielding. The electron beam (green arrow) passes through a system of quadrupole magnets and steerer elements (1) that…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Cross-section through the QCLAM spectrometer. Electrons scattered off the target in the scattering chamber are focused horizontally in the quadrupole magnet and are bend by a dipole magnet towards the detector system. first pass through a horizontally focusing quadrupo…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: QCLAM spectrometer detector system. This is required to calculate the intersection with its curved focal plane. By measuring electron energy spectra of known nuclei, the intersection point can be associated with an energy value. The X1 and X2 chambers are used to calcu…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Design of the (𝑒, 𝑒′ 𝛾) scattering chamber. The electron beam enters the scattering chamber from the left through a 44.5 mm wide beam pipe. The primary electron beam passes the target and exits through a beam pipe with a diameter of 154 mm heading towards the beam dump…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: provides a photo of the DAGOBERT array [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: CST simulation of magnetic field maps for different spectrometer angles (top row: 𝜃Spec = 47.5 ◦ and bottom row: 𝜃Spec = 132.5 ◦ ) with and without magnetic field shielding. The first column represents no shielding. The second column has a magnetic field shielding in …
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Concept of the electron-𝛾 coincidence data acquisition system [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Deflection of the scattered electrons in the magnetic field of the QCLAM spectrometer. The magnetic system deflects electrons with the same momentum but different vertical entry angles to the same point on the curved focal plane. In the straight detector plane, the sc…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Correction of the electron-optical aberration. The elastic line of 96Ru was shifted over the focal plane by using 11 different magnetic field settings. was used instead. The parameters 𝑎, 𝑏, 𝑐, 𝑑 and 𝑓 are obtained by fitting the equations above to the measured rate d…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: 12C spectrum measured in inclusive electron scattering. The elastic line 0 + 1 , the 2 + 1 and the 0 + 2 Hoyle state [53] are used for an energy calibration [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: LaBr3 :Ce spectrum of the 35Cl(𝑛, 𝛾) 36Cl reaction using an Am − Be source for energy calibration up to 9 MeV. The spectrum is divided into three parts: intrinsic radioactivity of the detector, Be + 𝛼 → 12C reaction and subsequent 𝛾 decay and 35Cl(𝑛, 𝛾) 36Cl reaction.…
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Time difference spectrum of QCLAM and DAGOBERT trigger timestamps. Blue: time-of-flight corrected spectrum, orange: uncorrected measured spectrum. In addition, time gates for background subtraction (compare Sec. 6.4) are shown. Green: true events including random coin…
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Time difference dependence of 𝐸𝛾 for detector number 5. In the upper panel the photon energy 𝐸𝛾 versus time difference Δ𝑡 is shown. An energy dependence of the time difference peak is visible. For the correction of the effect, a quadratic function is fitted to the pea…
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Background- and efficiency-corrected 𝐸𝑥 -𝐸𝛾 matrix for 96Ru at an electron beam energy 𝐸𝑖 = 85 MeV and a scattering angle 𝜃Spec = 46.3 ◦ . B. Hesbacher, G. Steinhilber, J. Isaak, N. Pietralla et al.: Preprint submitted to Elsevier Page 21 of 35 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figur…
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_19.png]
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Procedure for subtracting bremsstrahlung from the measured (𝑒, 𝑒′ 𝛾) spectra for individually resolved states using the decay of the 2 + 1 state of 96Ru as example. Due to the low density of states, regions in the 𝐸𝑥 -𝐸𝛾 matrix at small excitation energies can be sele…
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: Projection of the 𝐸𝑥 -𝐸𝛾 matrix on the 𝐸𝑥 axis. Fits of asymmetric Gaussian functions with radiative tail and linear background to the recognizable peaks are shown in orange. Numerous peaks are observed corresponding to nuclear excitations of 96Ru or 197Au. For the de…
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: Angular distribution of the 2 + 1 → 0 + 1 decay in the 96Ru(𝑒, 𝑒′ 𝛾) reaction. The results are compared to PWBA and DWBA calculations. The data is normalized to the PWBA calculations and given in arbitrary units. The corresponding absolute FEP efficiency 𝜖FEP correcte…
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: shows DWBA results for a scattering angle of 47.5 ◦ . The cross section is averaged over the detector resolution Δ𝜔∕𝜔 = 3%, corresponding to 50 keV (FWHM). Since the line width is negligibly small (Γ rad 𝐽 = Γ𝐽 = 0.162(7) meV [71]) compared to the resolution, this ave…
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: presents a 𝛾-ray spectrum obtained from a projection of the 𝐸𝑥 -𝐸𝛾 matrix limiting the excitation energy to values above 𝑆𝑛 . 0 1 2 3 4 E (MeV) 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 Counts / 10 keV ×104 511 keV 788 keV 942 keV 1141 keV Ex (MeV) Ru > 10.7 1.141 0.942 0.788 96Ru(e, e'n 9…
Figure 25
Figure 25. Figure 25: Comparison of the 𝛾-energy spectra of the 2 + 3 excited state of 96Ru. B. Hesbacher, G. Steinhilber, J. Isaak, N. Pietralla et al.: Preprint submitted to Elsevier Page 29 of 35 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_25.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

84 extracted references · 79 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Hofstadter, Electron Scattering and Nuclear Structure, Rev

    R. Hofstadter, Electron Scattering and Nuclear Structure, Rev. Mod. Phys. 28 (1956) 214–254

    1956

  2. [2]

    B. Hahn, D. G. Ravenhall, R. Hofstadter, High-Energy Electron Scattering and the Charge Distributions of Selected Nuclei, Phys. Rev. 101 (1956) 1131–1142

    1956

  3. [3]

    Hofstadter, The Electron-Scattering Method and its Application to the Structure of Nuclei and Nucleons, Nobel Lecture (1961)

    R. Hofstadter, The Electron-Scattering Method and its Application to the Structure of Nuclei and Nucleons, Nobel Lecture (1961)

    1961

  4. [4]

    T. W. Donnelly, I. Sick, Elastic magnetic electron scattering from nuclei, Rev. Mod. Phys. 56 (1984) 461–566

    1984

  5. [5]

    B. W. Downs, D. G. Ravenhall, D. R. Yennie, Electron Scattering from Nonspherical Nuclei, Phys. Rev. 106 (1957) 1285–1289

    work page 1957

  6. [6]

    M. K. Pal, Electron Scattering by the Quadrupole Charge Distribution of N14, Phys. Rev. 117 (1960) 566–572

    work page 1960

  7. [7]

    Goldemberg, R

    J. Goldemberg, R. H. Pratt, Magnetic Electron Scattering from Nuclei, Rev. Mod. Phys. 38 (1966) 311–329

    work page 1966

  8. [8]

    T. A. Griffy, R. J. Qakes, Electron-Proton Coincidence Cross Section forHe3 andH3, Phys. Rev. 135 (1964) B1161–B1167

    work page 1964

Show all 84 references
  1. [9]

    Hofstadter, Structure of Nuclei and Nucleons, Science 136 (1962) 1013–1022

    R. Hofstadter, Structure of Nuclei and Nucleons, Science 136 (1962) 1013–1022

    1962

  2. [10]

    W. C. Barber, Inelastic Electron Scattering, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 12 (1962) 1–42

    1962

  3. [11]

    Pitthan, T

    R. Pitthan, T. Walcher, Inelastic electron scattering in the giant resonance region of La, Ce and Pr, Phys. Lett. B 36 (1971) 563–564

    1971

  4. [12]

    Heisenberg, Nuclear transition density determinations from inelastic electron scattering, Adv

    J. Heisenberg, Nuclear transition density determinations from inelastic electron scattering, Adv. Nucl. Phys. 12 (1981) 61–133

    1981

  5. [13]

    C. N. Papanicolas, Low energy experiments with continuous electron and photon beams, Nucl. Phys. A 446 (1985) 249–258

    1985

  6. [14]

    C. N. Papanicolas, S. E. Williamson, H. Rothhaas, G. O. Bolme, L. J. Koester, Jr., B. L. Miller, R. A. Miskimen, P. E. Mueller, and L. S. Cardman, (𝑒,𝑒′𝛾) Measurements on the 4.439-MeV State of12C, Phys. Rev. Lett. 54 (1985) 26–29

    1985

  7. [15]

    P. E. Mueller, Separation of the E2 and M1 form factors of the 6.32 MeV state of nitrogen-15 using (e,e’gamma), Ph.D. Thesis, University of Illinois, Illinois, 1993

    1993

  8. [16]

    J.R.Deininger,Nuclearstructureinoxygen-16measuredwith(e,e’gamma)coincidentelectronscattering,Ph.D.Thesis,UniversityofIllinois, Illinois, 1996

    1996

  9. [17]

    Pietralla, The Institute of Nuclear Physics at the TU Darmstadt, Nucl

    N. Pietralla, The Institute of Nuclear Physics at the TU Darmstadt, Nucl. Phys. News 28 (2018) 4–11

    2018

  10. [18]

    A.D’Alessio,P.vonNeumann-Cosel,N.Pietralla,M.Singer,V.Werner,TheQClam-SpectrometerattheS-DALINAC,in:J.-E.García-Ramos, M.V.Andrés,J.A.L.Valera,A.M.Moro,F.Pérez-Bernal(Eds.),BasicConceptsinNuclearPhysics:Theory,ExperimentsandApplications, Springer International Publishing, Cham...

    2019

  11. [19]

    Rasmussen, BrilLanCe 380 Scintillation Material, 2004

    B. Rasmussen, BrilLanCe 380 Scintillation Material, 2004

    2004

  12. [20]

    Dirac, The quantum theory of the emission and absorption of radiation, Proc

    P. Dirac, The quantum theory of the emission and absorption of radiation, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 114 (1927) 243–265

    1927

  13. [21]

    de Forest, J

    T. de Forest, J. D. Walecka, Electron scattering and nuclear structure, Adv. Phys. 15 (1966) 1–109

    1966

  14. [22]

    Überall, Electron Scattering from Complex Nuclei: Part B, volume 2, Academic Press, New York, 1971

    H. Überall, Electron Scattering from Complex Nuclei: Part B, volume 2, Academic Press, New York, 1971

    1971

  15. [23]

    T. Suda, H. Simon, Prospects for electron scattering on unstable, exotic nuclei, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 96 (2017) 1–31

    2017

  16. [24]

    von Neumann-Cosel, C

    P. von Neumann-Cosel, C. Rangacharyulu, A. Richter, G. Schrieder, A. Stascheck, S. Strauch, Complete Spectroscopy of an Isobaric Analog Resonance with the(𝑒,𝑒′𝑝)Reaction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997) 2924–2927

    1997

  17. [25]

    Diesener, U

    H. Diesener, U. Helm, P. von Neumann-Cosel, A. Richter, G. Schrieder, S. Strauch, Isoscalar multipole strength decomposition in40Ca with the(𝑒,𝑒′𝛼0) reaction, Phys. Lett. B 352 (1995) 201–206

    1995

  18. [26]

    Cowley, R

    P.vonNeumann-Cosel,H.Diesener,U.Helm,G.Herbert,V.Huck,A.Richter,G.Schrieder,A.Stascheck,A.Stiller,J.Ryckebusch,J.Carter, A. Cowley, R. Fearick, J. Lawrie, S. Mills, R. Newman, J. Pilcher, F. Smit, Z. Vilakazi, D. Whittal, Excitation and decay of electric giant resonances in th...

    1994

  19. [27]

    Strauch, P

    S. Strauch, P. von Neumann-Cosel, C. Rangacharyulu, A. Richter, G. Schrieder, K. Schweda, J. Wambach, Giant Resonances in the Doubly Magic Nucleus48Cafrom the(𝑒,𝑒′𝑛)Reaction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85 (2000) 2913–2916

    2000

  20. [28]

    D. F. Hubbard, M. E. Rose, Nuclear structure effects in bremsstrahlung, Nucl. Phys. 84 (1966) 337–379

    1966

  21. [29]

    H. L. Acker, M. E. Rose, Investigation of Nuclear Effects in Bremsstrahlung, Ann. Phys. 44 (1967) 336–362

    1967

  22. [30]

    Donnelly, Electron scattering and neutrino reactions in nuclei, Prog

    T. Donnelly, Electron scattering and neutrino reactions in nuclei, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 13 (1985) 183–236

    1985

  23. [31]

    H.Bethe,W.Heitler, Onthestoppingoffastparticlesandonthecreationofpositiveelectrons, Proc.R.soc.Lond.Ser.A-Contain.Pap.Math. Phys. Character 146 (1934) 83–112

    1934

  24. [32]

    Sonnabend, D

    K. Sonnabend, D. Savran, J. Beller, M. A. Büssing, A. Constantinescu, M. Elvers, J. Endres, M. Fritzsche, J. Glorius, J. Hasper, J. Isaak, B. Löher, S. Müller, N. Pietralla, C. Romig, A. Sauerwein, L. Schnorrenberger, C. Wälzlein, A. Zilges, M. Zweidinger, The Darmstadt High-I...

    2011

  25. [33]

    M. G. Meier, Entwicklung und Aufbau der Laser-getriebenen Compton-Rückstreuquelle COBRA für Strahldiagnose am S-DALINAC, Doctoral Thesis, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Darmstadt, 2024

    2024

  26. [34]

    Savran, K

    D. Savran, K. Lindenberg, J. Glorius, B.Löher, S. Müller, N. Pietralla, L. Schnorrenberger, V. Simon, K. Sonnabend, C. Wälzlein, M.Elvers, J. Endres, J. Hasper, A. Zilges, The low-energy photon tagger NEPTUN, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 613 (2010) 232–239

    2010

  27. [35]

    M. Knirsch, Konzeption, Aufbau und Erprobung eines hochauflösenden QCLAM-Elektronenspektrometers mit großem Raumwinkel und hoher Impulsakzeptanz am Elektronenbeschleuniger S-DALINAC, Doctoral Thesis, Technische Hochschule Darmstadt, Darmstadt, 1991

    1991

  28. [36]

    G. C. Lüttge, Entwicklung und Aufbau eines Magnetsystems für Elektronenstreuung unter180◦ und vollständige Bestimmung der magnetis- chen Dipol- und Quadrupolstärkeverteilung in28Si, Doctoral Thesis, Technische Hochschule Darmstadt, Darmstadt, 1994

    1994

  29. [37]

    Detector system and performance of the electron scattering apparatus, Nucl

    D.Schüll,J.Foh,H.-D.Gräf,H.Miska,R.Schneider,E.Spamer,H.Theissen,O.Titze,T.Walcher, Highresolutionelectronscatteringfacility at the Darmstadt linear accelerator (DALINAC): III. Detector system and performance of the electron scattering apparatus, Nucl. Instrum. and Methods 153...

    1978

  30. [38]

    Singer, U

    M. Singer, U. Bonnes, A. D’Alessio, M. Hilcker, P. von Neumann-Cosel, N. Pietralla, New data acquisition system of the Lintott magnetic spectrometer at the S-DALINAC, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 999 (2021) 165115

    2021

  31. [39]

    Jürgensen, Entwicklung und Aufbau eines Hochenergie-Elektronen-Scrapersystems für den S-DALINAC, Doctoral Thesis, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Darmstadt, 2018

    L. Jürgensen, Entwicklung und Aufbau eines Hochenergie-Elektronen-Scrapersystems für den S-DALINAC, Doctoral Thesis, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Darmstadt, 2018. B. Hesbacher, G. Steinhilber, J. Isaak, N. Pietralla et al.:Preprint submitted to Elsevier Page 33 of 35 The ...

    2018

  32. [40]

    K.-D. Hummel, Entwicklung Aufbau und Inbetriebnahme eines Vieldratdriftkammer-Detektorsystems für das QCLAM-Spektrometer am supraleitenden Darmstädter Elektronenbeschleuniger S-DALINAC, Doctoral Thesis, Technische Hochschule Darmstadt, Darmstadt, 1992

    1992

  33. [41]

    F. Neumeyer, Untersuchung magnetischer Kernanregungen in48Ca und 90Zr mit hochauflösender Elektronenstreuung unter 180° am S- DALINAC, Doctoral Thesis, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Darmstadt, 1997

    1997

  34. [42]

    Singer, Entwicklung und Inbetriebnahme eines neuen Datenaufnahmesystems am QCLAM-Spektrometer, Doctoral Thesis, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Darmstadt, 2019

    M. Singer, Entwicklung und Inbetriebnahme eines neuen Datenaufnahmesystems am QCLAM-Spektrometer, Doctoral Thesis, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Darmstadt, 2019

    2019

  35. [43]

    Steinhilber, The electron-gamma coincidence setup at the S-DALINAC, Doctoral Thesis, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Darmstadt, 2022

    G. Steinhilber, The electron-gamma coincidence setup at the S-DALINAC, Doctoral Thesis, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Darmstadt, 2022

    2022

  36. [44]

    Schneider, M

    D. Schneider, M. Arnold, U. Bonnes, A. Brauch, M. Dutine, R. Grewe, L. E. Jürgensen, N. Pietralla, F. Schließmann, G. Steinhilber, Development of an active beam-stabilization system for electrofission experiments at the S-DALINAC, in: Proc. IPAC’24, 15th International Particle...

    2024

  37. [45]

    Saint-Gobain Crystals, Scintillation Products Technical Note - Lanthanum Bromide Scintillation Performance Summary, 2021

    2021

  38. [46]

    B.Löher,D.Savran,E.Fiori,M.Miklavec,N.Pietralla,M.Vencelj, Highcountrate 𝛾-rayspectroscopywithLaBr3:Cescintillationdetectors, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 686 (2012) 1–6

    2012

  39. [47]

    Dassault Systémes, CST Studio Suite 2020.00 - release notes, 2019

    2020

  40. [48]

    E. L. Goldwasser, F. E. Mills, A. O. Hanson, Ionization Loss and Straggling of Fast Electrons, Phys. Rev. 88 (1952) 1137–1141

    1952

  41. [49]

    URL:https://web.archive.org/web/ 20201022154112/https://www.gsi.de/work/forschung/experimentelektronik/datenverarbeitung/datenerfassung/ mbs.htm

    GSI Helmholzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung GmbH, GSI multi branch system, 22.10.2020. URL:https://web.archive.org/web/ 20201022154112/https://www.gsi.de/work/forschung/experimentelektronik/datenverarbeitung/datenerfassung/ mbs.htm

    2020

  42. [50]

    URL:https://www.struck.de/ sis3316.html

    Struck Innovative Systems GmbH, SIS3316 16 channel 125/250 MSPS 14/16-bit Digitizer Family, 2024. URL:https://www.struck.de/ sis3316.html

    2024

  43. [51]

    H. T. Johansson, The UCESB unpacker generator, 2010. URL:http://fy.chalmers.se/~f96hajo/ucesb/

    2010

  44. [52]

    Zamfir, Coulomb excitation of the2+ 𝑚𝑠 state of96Ru in inverse kinematics, Phys

    N.Pietralla,C.J.Barton,R.Krücken,C.W.Beausang,M.A.Caprio,R.F.Casten,J.R.Cooper,A.A.Hecht,H.Newman,J.R.Novak,N.V. Zamfir, Coulomb excitation of the2+ 𝑚𝑠 state of96Ru in inverse kinematics, Phys. Rev. C 64 (2001) 031301(R)

    2001

  45. [53]

    Hoyle, On Nuclear Reactions Occuring in Very Hot STARS.I

    F. Hoyle, On Nuclear Reactions Occuring in Very Hot STARS.I. the Synthesis of Elements from Carbon to Nickel, Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 1 (1954) 121

    1954

  46. [54]

    J. H. Kelley, J. E. Purcell, C. G. Sheu, Energy levels of light nuclei𝐴=12 , Nucl. Phys. A 968 (2017) 71–253

    2017

  47. [55]

    F.Hofmann,P.vonNeumann-Cosel,F.Neumeyer,C.Rangacharyulu,B.Reitz,A.Richter,G.Schrieder,D.I.Sober,L.W.Fagg,B.A.Brown, Magnetic dipole transitions in32S from electron scattering at 180°, Phys. Rev. C 65 (2002) 024311

    2002

  48. [56]

    Helmer, C

    R. Helmer, C. van der Leun, Recommended standards for𝛾-ray energy calibration (1999), Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 450 (2000) 35–70

    1999

  49. [57]

    M. Wang, G. Audi, A. Wapstra, F. Kondev, M. MacCormick, X. Xu, B. Pfeiffer, The Ame2012 atomic mass evaluation, Chin. Phys. C 36 (2012) 1603

    2012

  50. [58]

    Hesbacher, Kernstrukturuntersuchungen an 96Ru mittels Elektron-Gamma-Koinzidenz-Reaktionen am S-DALINAC, M.Sc

    B. Hesbacher, Kernstrukturuntersuchungen an 96Ru mittels Elektron-Gamma-Koinzidenz-Reaktionen am S-DALINAC, M.Sc. Thesis, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Darmstadt, 2023

    2023

  51. [59]

    Allison, K

    J. Allison, K. Amako, J. Apostolakis, P. Arce, M. Asai, T. Aso, E. Bagli, A. Bagulya, S. Banerjee, G. Barrand, B. Beck, A. Bogdanov, D. Brandt, J. Brown, H. Burkhardt, P. Canal, D. Cano-Ott, S. Chauvie, K. Cho, G. Cirrone, G. Cooperman, M. Cortés-Giraldo, G. Cosmo, G. Cuttone,...

    2016

  52. [60]

    Allison, K

    J. Allison, K. Amako, J. Apostolakis, H. Araujo, P. Arce Dubois, M. Asai, G. Barrand, R. Capra, S. Chauvie, R. Chytracek, G. Cirrone, G. Cooperman, G. Cosmo, G. Cuttone, G. Daquino, M. Donszelmann, M. Dressel, G. Folger, F. Foppiano, J. Generowicz, V. Grichine, S. Guatelli, P....

    2006

  53. [61]

    Boudreau, L

    S.Agostinelli,J.Allison,K.Amako,J.Apostolakis,H.Araujo,P.Arce,M.Asai,D.Axen,S.Banerjee,G.Barrand,F.Behner,L.Bellagamba, J. Boudreau, L. Broglia, A. Brunengo, H. Burkhardt, S. Chauvie, J. Chuma, R. Chytracek, G. Cooperman, G. Cosmo, P. Degtyarenko, A. Dell’Acqua, G. Depaola, D....

    2003

  54. [62]

    Mineva, P

    A.Hennig,T.Ahn,V.Anagnostatou,A.Blazhev,N.Cooper,V.Derya,M.Elvers,J.Endres,P.Goddard,A.Heinz,R.O.Hughes,G.Ilie,M.N. Mineva, P. Petkov, S. G. Pickstone, N. Pietralla, D. Radeck, T. J. Ross, D. Savran, M. Spieker, V. Werner, A. Zilges, Collective excitations of 96Ru by means of(...

    2015

  55. [63]

    H.Bolotin,D.Kennedy,B.Linard,A.Stuchbery,S.Sie,I.Katayama,H.Sakai, Measuredlifetimesofstatesin197Auandacriticalcomparison with the weak-coupling core-excitation model, Nucl. Phys. A 321 (1979) 231–249

    1979

  56. [64]

    D.H.Jakubassa-Amundsen,V.Y.Ponomarev, Coincidentexcitationandradiativedecayinelectron-nucleuscollisions, Phys.Rev.C95(2017) 024310

    2017

  57. [65]

    Ravenhall, R

    D. Ravenhall, R. Schult, J. Wambach, C. Papanicolas, S. Williamson, Coincident electron scattering in distorted wave Born approximation I. The(𝑒,𝑒′𝛾)process, Ann. Phys. 178 (1987) 187–226

    1987

  58. [66]

    Visscher, K

    L. Visscher, K. Dyall, Dirac–Fock atomic electronic structure calculations using different nuclear charge distributions, At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 67 (1997) 207–224

    1997

  59. [67]

    Salvat, J

    F. Salvat, J. Fernández-Varea, W. Williamson, Accurate numerical solution of the radial Schrödinger and Dirac wave equations, Comput. Phys. Commun. 90 (1995) 151–168

    1995

  60. [68]

    G.Colò,L.Cao,N.VanGiai,L.Capelli, Self-consistentRPAcalculationswithSkyrme-typeinteractions:Theskyrme_rpaprogram, Comput. Phys. Commun. 184 (2013) 142–161

    2013

  61. [69]

    G. Colò, X. Roca-Maza, User guide for the hfbcs-qrpa(v1) code, 2021.arXiv:2102.06562

    2021 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Dobaczewski, H

    J. Dobaczewski, H. Flocard, J. Treiner, Hartree-Fock-Bogolyubov description of nuclei near the neutron-drip line, Nucl. Phys. A 422 (1984) 103–139

    1984

  63. [71]

    Klein, A

    H. Klein, A. F. Lisetskiy, N. Pietralla, C. Fransen, A. Gade, P. von Brentano, Proton-neutron mixed-symmetry2+ ms and3+ ms states in96Ru, Phys. Rev. C 65 (2002) 044315

    2002

  64. [72]

    Ball, Studies of95Ru and94Ru with the96Ru(𝑝,𝑑) and(𝑝,𝑡) reactions, Nucl

    J. Ball, Studies of95Ru and94Ru with the96Ru(𝑝,𝑑) and(𝑝,𝑡) reactions, Nucl. Phys. A 160 (1971) 225–236

    1971

  65. [73]

    Savran, M

    D. Savran, M. Babilon, A. M. van den Berg, M. N. Harakeh, J. Hasper, A. Matic, H. J. Wörtche, A. Zilges, Nature of the Pygmy Dipole Resonance in140Ce Studied in(𝛼,𝛼′𝛾) Experiments, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (2006) 172502

    2006

  66. [74]

    Pietralla, V

    D.Savran,V.Derya,S.Bagchi,J.Endres,M.Harakeh,J.Isaak,N.Kalantar-Nayestanaki,E.Lanza,B.Löher,A.Najafi,S.Pascu,S.Pickstone, N. Pietralla, V. Ponomarev, C. Rigollet, C. Romig, M. Spieker, A. Vitturi, A. Zilges, Multi-messenger investigation of the Pygmy Dipole Resonance in140Ce, ...

    2018

  67. [75]

    Savran, T

    D. Savran, T. Aumann, A. Zilges, Experimental studies of the Pygmy Dipole Resonance, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 70 (2013) 210–245

    2013

  68. [76]

    Lanza, L

    E. Lanza, L. Pellegri, A. Vitturi, M. Andrés, Theoretical studies of Pygmy Resonances, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 129 (2023) 104006

    2023

  69. [77]

    S. F. Semenko, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 34 (1981)

    1981

  70. [78]

    V. O. Nesterenko, A. Repko, J. Kvasil, P.-G. Reinhard, Individual Low-Energy Toroidal Dipole State in24Mg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 (2018) 182501

    2018

  71. [79]

    V.O.Nesterenko,A.Repko,J.Kvasil,P.-G.Reinhard, Individualdipoletoroidalstates:Mainfeaturesandsearchinthe (𝑒,𝑒′)reaction, Phys. Rev. C 100 (2019) 064302

    2019

  72. [80]

    Repko, V

    A. Repko, V. O. Nesterenko, J. Kvasil, P.-G. Reinhard, Systematics of toroidal dipole modes in Ca, Ni, Zr, and Sn isotopes, Eur. Phys. J. A 55 (2019) 242–257

    2019

  73. [81]

    von Neumann-Cosel, V

    P. von Neumann-Cosel, V. O. Nesterenko, I. Brandherm, P. I. Vishnevskiy, P.-G. Reinhard, J. Kvasil, H. Matsubara, A. Repko, A. Richter, M. Scheck, A. Tamii, Candidate Toroidal Electric Dipole Mode in the Spherical Nucleus58Ni, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133 (2024) 232502

    2024

  74. [82]

    Kleemann, N

    J. Kleemann, N. Pietralla, U. Friman-Gayer, J. Isaak, O. Papst, K. Prifti, V. Werner, A. D. Ayangeakaa, T. Beck, G. Colò, M. L. Cortés, S. W. Finch, M. Fulghieri, D. Gribble, K. E. Ide, X. K.-H. James, R. V. F. Janssens, S. R. Johnson, P. Koseoglou, Krishichayan, D. Savran, W....

    2025

  75. [83]

    The Electron-Gamma Coincidence Setup DAGOBERT

    B. Hesbacher, G. Steinhilber, J. Isaak, N. Pietralla, J. Birkhan, I. Brandherm, M. L. Cortes, D. Jakubassa-Amundsen, I. Jurosevic, P. von Neumann-Cosel, M. Rech, X. Roca-Maza, D. Schneider, Dataset for "The Electron-Gamma Coincidence Setup DAGOBERT" Manuscript ,

  76. [2025]

    URL:https://doi.org/10.48328/tudatalib-1665. B. Hesbacher, G. Steinhilber, J. Isaak, N. Pietralla et al.:Preprint submitted to Elsevier Page 35 of 35

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.