pith. sign in

arxiv: 2512.11555 · v2 · submitted 2025-12-12 · ⚛️ nucl-th · nucl-ex

The B(E2) anomaly: Evidence for a low-lying mixed-symmetry collective excitation mode

Bo Cederwall , Chong Qi This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 22:46 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ nucl-th nucl-ex
keywords B(E2) anomalymixed-symmetry modeinteracting boson modelnuclear collectivityneutron-deficient nucleiquadrupole transitionsIBM Hamiltoniancollective excitations
0
0 comments X

The pith

The B(E2) anomaly arises from a low-lying mixed-symmetry collective mode bridging single-particle and collective dynamics in certain neutron-deficient nuclei.

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

The paper investigates the B(E2) anomaly, where the ratio B(E2; 4+ to 2+) over B(E2; 2+ to 0+) falls below 1 in nuclei near N=94 (W, Os, Pt) and N=62 (Te, Xe) despite energy patterns indicating collective motion. Standard shell-model, collective, and density-functional approaches cannot reproduce this suppression, and a recent triaxial-rotor mapping to the IBM is questioned because collectivity should begin with vibrational modes as valence nucleons increase. By applying an extended IBM Hamiltonian across the affected nuclei and benchmarking it against large-scale shell-model results, the work shows that the anomaly is reproduced when a low-lying mixed-symmetry mode is included. This mode is presented as the mechanism that reconciles the observed transition strengths with the collective level structures.

Core claim

The central claim is that the B(E2) anomaly originates from a low-lying mixed-symmetry collective excitation mode within an extended IBM Hamiltonian, rather than from triaxial rotation. This mode accounts for the suppressed B_{4/2} ratios while preserving the collective energy spectra in the neutron-deficient regions studied, offering a unified description that bridges single-particle and fully collective regimes.

What carries the argument

The extended IBM Hamiltonian with parameters chosen to generate a low-lying mixed-symmetry mode, which carries the argument by reproducing the anomalous B(E2) ratios across the isotopic chains when benchmarked to shell-model calculations.

If this is right

  • Collectivity in these nuclei with few valence particles emerges first through a mixed-symmetry mode instead of pure vibrational excitations.
  • The same mechanism explains the anomaly in both the N≈94 and N≈62 regions under one framework.
  • Signatures of the mixed-symmetry mode, such as enhanced M1 transitions, should appear at low excitation energies in the affected isotopes.
  • Large-scale shell-model calculations are expected to show the mixed-symmetry character when the IBM mapping is applied consistently.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Similar B(E2) anomalies may occur in other transitional nuclei with comparable numbers of valence nucleons outside closed shells.
  • The interpretation suggests that mixed-symmetry degrees of freedom should be included earlier in models of the single-particle to collective transition.
  • Experimental confirmation could come from measuring M1 strengths or two-nucleon transfer reactions that probe the mixed-symmetry character directly.

Load-bearing premise

The extended IBM parameters can be selected to match the anomaly data without the selection itself presupposing the mixed-symmetry interpretation.

What would settle it

A parameter set fixed solely from shell-model energies and transition strengths (without reference to the B_{4/2} values) that fails to produce B_{4/2} < 1 in the affected nuclei would falsify the claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.11555 by Bo Cederwall, Chong Qi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (Color online) Experimental excitation energy ratios, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Exceptionally low values of the ratio of electric quadrupole transition rates, $B_{4/2}\equiv B(E2;4^+_1\rightarrow2^+_1)/B(E2;2^+_1\rightarrow0^+_{\mathrm{gs}})<1$, have been observed in neutron-deficient nuclei near $N\approx94$ (W, Os, Pt) and $N\approx62$ (Te, Xe) with few and comparable numbers of valence nucleons outside closed shells. Remarkably, the suppressed $B_{4/2}$ ratios coincide with low-lying energy level patterns characteristic of collective motion. Standard approaches, including large-scale shell model, collective models, and density functional theory, fail to reproduce this behavior, commonly referred to as the $B{4/2}$ (or $B(E2)$) anomaly. Recent work has reproduced the effect in selected Pt and Os isotopes via mapping a triaxial rotor Hamiltonian onto the interacting boson model (IBM), attributing it to triaxial rotational motion. However, this interpretation is unexpected as collectivity typically emerges first through vibrational modes with increasing valence nucleon number along isotopic chains. Here, we address this discrepancy using an extended IBM Hamiltonian across nuclei exhibiting the anomaly, benchmarked against large-scale shell model calculations, and propose that the $B(E2)$ anomaly arises from a low-lying mixed-symmetry collective mode that bridges single-particle and collective dynamics.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that the B(E2) anomaly—suppressed B_{4/2} ratios below 1 in neutron-deficient W/Os/Pt (N≈94) and Te/Xe (N≈62) nuclei despite collective level patterns—arises from a low-lying mixed-symmetry collective excitation mode within an extended IBM Hamiltonian. This mode is proposed to bridge single-particle and collective regimes, with the claim supported by benchmarking the extended IBM against large-scale shell-model calculations and contrasted against standard collective models and a recent triaxial-rotor mapping interpretation.

Significance. If the central claim holds with independent parameter determination, the work would offer a substantive advance by extending the IBM to incorporate mixed-symmetry degrees of freedom as an explanation for anomalous transition rates in transitional nuclei. The explicit benchmarking against shell-model results is a methodological strength that could guide microscopic derivations and motivate targeted experiments for mixed-symmetry signatures.

major comments (1)
  1. [Extended IBM Hamiltonian construction and benchmarking against shell-model results] The load-bearing claim that the anomaly is reproduced by a low-lying mixed-symmetry mode requires explicit demonstration that the extended IBM Hamiltonian parameters (including any higher-order or mixed-symmetry terms) are fixed independently of the B(E2) data. The manuscript must clarify whether parameters are obtained from energy spectra alone, from a microscopic mapping that excludes transition rates, or from a fit that includes the very B_{4/2} values under discussion; without this, the attribution risks circularity.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract refers to 'recent work' reproducing the effect via triaxial rotor mapping but does not provide the citation; add the reference for completeness.
  2. [Abstract and introduction] Notation for the ratio is inconsistent (B_{4/2} vs. B{4/2}); standardize throughout and define B_{4/2} explicitly on first use.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive feedback. The central concern regarding potential circularity in parameter determination is addressed below. We will revise the manuscript to include an explicit clarification of the fitting procedure.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Extended IBM Hamiltonian construction and benchmarking against shell-model results] The load-bearing claim that the anomaly is reproduced by a low-lying mixed-symmetry mode requires explicit demonstration that the extended IBM Hamiltonian parameters (including any higher-order or mixed-symmetry terms) are fixed independently of the B(E2) data. The manuscript must clarify whether parameters are obtained from energy spectra alone, from a microscopic mapping that excludes transition rates, or from a fit that includes the very B_{4/2} values under discussion; without this, the attribution risks circularity.

    Authors: We agree that explicit clarification is needed to rule out circularity. The extended IBM parameters are fixed using only the experimental energy spectra of the low-lying states together with a microscopic mapping derived from the corresponding large-scale shell-model calculations. The shell-model results supply the energies and the structure of the wave functions (including the mixed-symmetry components) but are not used to fit any B(E2) matrix elements. The B_{4/2} ratios are computed after the parameters have been determined and are compared to both experiment and the shell-model predictions as an independent test. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated subsection (new Section III.B) that tabulates the fitting protocol, lists the observables used for each parameter, and states explicitly that no transition-strength data entered the fit. This addition removes any ambiguity about the independence of the parameter set. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; IBM parameters benchmarked to independent shell-model results

full rationale

The manuscript uses an extended IBM Hamiltonian benchmarked against large-scale shell-model calculations that already exhibit the B(E2) anomaly. The mixed-symmetry interpretation is presented as arising from the structure of the Hamiltonian that reproduces those shell-model energies and transition rates. No equations or sections are quoted that reduce the claimed prediction to a parameter fit performed on the target B(E2) ratios themselves, nor is there load-bearing self-citation of a uniqueness theorem from the same authors. The derivation chain remains independent of the final interpretation step.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 1 invented entities

Review based on abstract only; specific free parameters in the extended IBM and any domain assumptions are not detailed in the provided text.

invented entities (1)
  • low-lying mixed-symmetry collective mode no independent evidence
    purpose: to explain the suppressed B4/2 ratios while preserving collective energy patterns
    Postulated new excitation mode bridging single-particle and collective regimes

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5558 in / 1167 out tokens · 37465 ms · 2026-05-16T22:46:43.647707+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 65 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Otsuka, Y

    T. Otsuka, Y. Tsunoda, T. Abe, N. Shimizu, P. Van Dup- pen, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 222502 (2019)

    work page 2019

  2. [2]

    Iudice, F

    N.L. Iudice, F. Palumbo, Phys. Rev. Lett.41, 1532 (1978)

    work page 1978

  3. [3]

    A. Bohr, B. Mottelson,Nuclear Structure, Vol.II(W.A. Benjamin, New York, 1975)

    work page 1975

  4. [4]

    Bohle, A

    D. Bohle, A. Richter, W. Steffen, A. Dieperink, N. Lo Iu- dice, F. Palumbo, O. Scholten, Physics Letters B137(1), 27 (1984), ISSN 0370-2693

    work page 1984

  5. [5]

    Heyde, P

    K. Heyde, P. von Neumann-Cosel, A. Richter, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 2365 (2010)

    work page 2010

  6. [6]

    Van Isacker, M.A

    P. Van Isacker, M.A. Nagarajan, D.D. Warner, Phys. Rev. C45, R13 (1992)

    work page 1992

  7. [7]

    Warner, P

    D. Warner, P. Van Isacker, Physics Letters B395(3), 145 (1997), ISSN 0370-2693

    work page 1997

  8. [8]

    Sun, C.L

    Y. Sun, C.L. Wu, K. Bhatt, M. Guidry, D.H. Feng, Phys. Rev. Lett.80, 672 (1998)

    work page 1998

  9. [9]

    Shimizu, T

    N. Shimizu, T. Otsuka, T. Mizusaki, M. Honma, Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 1171 (2001)

    work page 2001

  10. [10]

    Sun, C.L

    Y. Sun, C.L. Wu, K. Bhatt, M. Guidry, Nuclear Physics A703(1), 130 (2002), ISSN 0375-9474 6 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 symm. rotor asym. rotor vibr. limit R4/2 Pt, experiment Pt, IBM-1 + HM S Os, experiment Os, IBM1 + HM S W, experiment 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 120 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 Alaga vibr.limit Nν B4/2 FIG. 1. ...

    work page 2002

  11. [11]

    Balbutsev, P

    E. Balbutsev, P. Schuck, Nuclear Physics A731, 256 (2004), ISSN 0375-9474

    work page 2004

  12. [12]

    Caprio, F

    M.A. Caprio, F. Iachello, Phys. Rev. Lett.93, 242502 (2004)

    work page 2004

  13. [13]

    Thiamova, D

    G. Thiamova, D. Rowe, J. Wood, Nuclear Physics A 780(3), 112 (2006), ISSN 0375-9474

    work page 2006

  14. [14]

    Hatada, K

    K. Hatada, K. Hayakawa, F. Palumbo, Phys. Rev. C84, 011302 (2011)

    work page 2011

  15. [15]

    Hatada, K

    K. Hatada, K. Hayakawa, F. Palumbo, Phys. Rev. C88, 014305 (2013)

    work page 2013

  16. [16]

    Gu´ ery-Odelin, S

    D. Gu´ ery-Odelin, S. Stringari, Phys. Rev. Lett.83, 4452 (1999)

    work page 1999

  17. [17]

    Marag` o, S.A

    O.M. Marag` o, S.A. Hopkins, J. Arlt, E. Hodby, G. Hechenblaikner, C.J. Foot, Phys. Rev. Lett.84, 2056 (2000)

    work page 2056

  18. [18]

    Lipparini, S

    E. Lipparini, S. Stringari, Phys. Rev. Lett.63, 570 (1989) 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 symm. rotor asym. rotor vibr. limit R4/2 Te, experiment Xe, experiment Xe, IBM-1 + HM S Xe, LSSM 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 120 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 Alaga vibr.limit Nν B4/2 FIG. 2. (Color online) Experimental and calculated exci- tatio...

    work page 1989

  19. [19]

    Serra, A

    L.m.c. Serra, A. Puente, E. Lipparini, Phys. Rev. B60, R13966 (1999)

    work page 1999

  20. [20]

    Minguzzi, M.P

    A. Minguzzi, M.P. Tosi, Phys. Rev. A63, 023609 (2001)

    work page 2001

  21. [21]

    Hatada, K

    K. Hatada, K. Hayakawa, F. Palumbo, Phys. Rev. B71, 092402 (2005)

    work page 2005

  22. [22]

    Wilets, M

    L. Wilets, M. Jean, Phys. Rev.102, 788 (1956)

    work page 1956

  23. [23]

    Davydov, G

    A. Davydov, G. Filippov, Nuclear Physics8, 237 (1958)

    work page 1958

  24. [24]

    Iachello, A

    F. Iachello, A. Arima,The Interacting Boson Model (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1987)

    work page 1987

  25. [25]

    Casten,Nuclear Structure from a Simple Perspective (Oxford University Press, New York, 1990)

    R. Casten,Nuclear Structure from a Simple Perspective (Oxford University Press, New York, 1990)

    work page 1990

  26. [26]

    Warner, R.F

    D.D. Warner, R.F. Casten, Phys. Rev. C28, 1798 (1983)

    work page 1983

  27. [27]

    Jolie, R.F

    J. Jolie, R.F. Casten, P. von Brentano, V. Werner, Phys. Rev. Lett.87, 162501 (2001)

    work page 2001

  28. [28]

    Heyde,Basic Ideas and Concepts in Nuclear Physics: An introductory approach(Institute of Physics Publish- 7 ing, 2004)

    K. Heyde,Basic Ideas and Concepts in Nuclear Physics: An introductory approach(Institute of Physics Publish- 7 ing, 2004)

    work page 2004

  29. [29]

    Doncel, T

    M. Doncel, T. B¨ ack, C. Qi, D.M. Cullen, D. Hodge, B. Cederwall, M.J. Taylor, M. Procter, M. Giles, K. Au- ranen et al., Phys. Rev. C96, 051304 (2017)

    work page 2017

  30. [30]

    Cakirli, R.F

    R.B. Cakirli, R.F. Casten, J. Jolie, N. Warr, Phys. Rev. C70, 047302 (2004)

    work page 2004

  31. [31]

    M¨ oller, N

    O. M¨ oller, N. Warr, J. Jolie, A. Dewald, A. Fitzler, A. Linnemann, K.O. Zell, P.E. Garrett, S.W. Yates, Physical Review C71, 064324 (2005)

    work page 2005

  32. [32]

    G´ omez, Ph.D

    M.J. G´ omez, Ph.D. thesis, Universitat de Valencia (2022)

    work page 2022

  33. [33]

    de Angelis, A

    G. de Angelis, A. Gadea, E. Farnea, R. Isocrate, P. Petkov, N. Marginean, D. Napoli, A. Dewald, M. Bel- lato, A. Bracco et al., Physics Letters B535(1), 93 (2002)

    work page 2002

  34. [34]

    Say˘ gı, D.T

    B. Say˘ gı, D.T. Joss, R.D. Page, T. Grahn, J. Simp- son, D. O’Donnell, G. Alharshan, K. Auranen, T. B¨ ack, S. Boening et al., Physical Review C96, 021301 (2017)

    work page 2017

  35. [35]

    Grahn, S

    T. Grahn, S. Stolze, D.T. Joss, R.D. Page, B. Say˘ gı, D. O’Donnell, M. Akmali, K. Andgren, L. Bianco, D.M. Cullen et al., Physical Review C94, 044327 (2016)

    work page 2016

  36. [36]

    Goasduff, J

    A. Goasduff, J. Ljungvall, T.R. Rodr´ ıguez, F.L. Bello Garrote, A. Etile, G. Georgiev, F. Giacoppo, L. Grente, M. Klintefjord, A. Ku¸ so˘ glu et al., Physical Review C100, 034302 (2019)

    work page 2019

  37. [37]

    Cederwall, M

    B. Cederwall, M. Doncel, O. Aktas, A. Ertoprak, R. Li- otta, C. Qi, T. Grahn, D.M. Cullen, B.S. Nara Singh, D. Hodge et al., Physical Review Letter121, 022502 (2018)

    work page 2018

  38. [38]

    Zhang, B

    W. Zhang, B. Cederwall, M. Doncel, . Aktas, A. Er- toprak, R. Liotta, C. Qi, T. Grahn, B. Nara Singh, D. Cullen et al., Physics Letters B820, 136527 (2021)

    work page 2021

  39. [39]

    Zanon, M

    I. Zanon, M. Doncel, B. Cederwall, T. Grahn, A. Illana, G. Appagere, K. Auranen, T. B¨ ack, V. Bogdanoff, A.D. Briscoe et al., Phys. Rev. C111, 034323 (2025)

    work page 2025

  40. [40]

    Milanovi´ c, et al., accepted for publication Phys

    T. Milanovi´ c, et al., accepted for publication Phys. Rev. C, 13 November 2025 (2025)

    work page 2025

  41. [41]

    Siciliano, J

    M. Siciliano, J. Valiente-Dob´ on, A. Goasduff, F. Nowacki, A. Zuker, D. Bazzacco, A. Lopez-Martens, E. Cl´ ement, G. Benzoni, T. Braunroth et al., Physics Letters B806, 135474 (2020)

    work page 2020

  42. [42]

    Kundu, M.S.R

    A. Kundu, M.S.R. Laskar, R. Palit, R. Raut, S. Santra, N. Shimizu, T. Togashi, E. Ideguchi, H. Pai, S. Ali et al., Physical Review C103, 034315 (2021)

    work page 2021

  43. [43]

    Jonsson, A

    N.G. Jonsson, A. B¨ acklin, J. Kantele, R. Julin, M. Luon- tama, A. Passoja, Nuclear Physics A371(2), 333 (1981)

    work page 1981

  44. [44]

    Gableske, A

    J. Gableske, A. Dewald, H. Tiesler, M. Wilhelm, T. Klemme, O. Vogel, I. Schneider, R. Peusquens, S. Kasemann, K. Zell et al., Nuclear Physics A691(3), 551 (2001)

    work page 2001

  45. [45]

    Otsuka, A

    T. Otsuka, A. Arima, F. Iachello, Nuclear Physics A 309(1), 1 (1978)

    work page 1978

  46. [46]

    Van Isacker, K

    P. Van Isacker, K. Heyde, J. Jolie, A. Sevrin, Annals of Physics171(2), 253 (1986), ISSN 0003-4916

    work page 1986

  47. [47]

    Zhang, W

    Y. Zhang, W. Teng, Phys. Rev. C111, 014324 (2025)

    work page 2025

  48. [48]

    Zhang, Y.W

    Y. Zhang, Y.W. He, D. Karlsson, C. Qi, F. Pan, J. Draayer, Physics Letters B834, 137443 (2022)

    work page 2022

  49. [49]

    Zhang, S.N

    Y. Zhang, S.N. Wang, F. Pan, C. Qi, J.P. Draayer, Phys. Rev. C110, 024303 (2024)

    work page 2024

  50. [50]

    W. Teng, Y. Zhang, C. Qi, Chinese Physics C49(1), 014102 (2025)

    work page 2025

  51. [51]

    F. Pan, Y. Zhang, Y. Wu, L. Dai, J.P. Draayer, Phys. Rev. C110, 054324 (2024)

    work page 2024

  52. [52]

    Hertz-Kintish, L

    D. Hertz-Kintish, L. Zamick, S.J.Q. Robinson, Phys. Rev. C90, 034307 (2014)

    work page 2014

  53. [53]

    Tobin, M.C

    G.K. Tobin, M.C. Ferriss, K.D. Launey, T. Dytrych, J.P. Draayer, A.C. Dreyfuss, C. Bahri, Phys. Rev. C89, 034312 (2014)

    work page 2014

  54. [54]

    Bohle, A

    D. Bohle, A. Richter, K. Heyde, P. Van Isacker, J. Moreau, A. Sevrin, Phys. Rev. Lett.55, 1661 (1985)

    work page 1985

  55. [55]

    T. Beck, J. Beller, N. Pietralla, M. Bhike, J. Birkhan, V. Derya, U. Gayer, A. Hennig, J. Isaak, B. L¨ oher et al., Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 212502 (2017)

    work page 2017

  56. [56]

    Iachello, Phys

    F. Iachello, Phys. Rev. Lett.53, 1427 (1984)

    work page 1984

  57. [57]

    Cederl¨ of, T

    E.A. Cederl¨ of, T. B¨ ack, J. Nyberg, C. Qi, A. Ata¸ c, T. Braunroth, T. Calverley, D.M. Cox, M. Doncel, T. Grahn et al., Phys. Rev. C.112(1) (2025)

    work page 2025

  58. [58]

    Ahlgren Cederl¨ of, W

    E. Ahlgren Cederl¨ of, W. Teng, Nazeef, C. Qi, Y. Zhang, pyIBM: A user-friendly Python package for IBM/IBFM- 1 calculations (1.0.2)(2025)

    work page 2025

  59. [59]

    Qi, Phys

    C. Qi, Phys. Rev. C94, 034310 (2016)

    work page 2016

  60. [60]

    Bonatsos, I.E

    D. Bonatsos, I.E. Assimakis, N. Minkov, A. Martinou, R.B. Cakirli, R.F. Casten, K. Blaum, Phys. Rev. C95, 064325 (2017)

    work page 2017

  61. [61]

    Bonatsos, A

    D. Bonatsos, A. Martinou, S.K. Peroulis, D. Pe- trellis, P. Vasileiou, T.J. Mertzimekis, N. Minkov, Symmetry16(12) (2024), ISSN 2073-8994, https://www.mdpi.com/2073-8994/16/12/1625

    work page 2024

  62. [62]

    W. Teng, Y. Zhang, S.N. Wang, F. Pan, C. Qi, J. Draayer, Physics Letters B865, 139487 (2025), ISSN 0370-2693

    work page 2025

  63. [63]

    Chen, Y.F

    F.Q. Chen, Y.F. Niu, Y. Sun, M. Wiedeking, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 082502 (2025)

    work page 2025

  64. [64]

    C.J. Lv, F.Q. Chen, Y. Sun, M. Guidry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 042502 (2022)

    work page 2022

  65. [65]

    Sonzogni et al.,National nuclear data center, http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/

    A. Sonzogni et al.,National nuclear data center, http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/

    work page