pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2602.16828 · v2 · submitted 2026-02-18 · ⚛️ physics.ins-det · nucl-ex

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Performance of the Endcap Time-of-Flight detector in the STAR beam-energy scan

Mathias C. Labont\'e , Daniel Cebra , Zachary Sweger , Geary Eppley , Frank Geurts , Yannick S\"ohngen , Norbert Herrmann , Esteban Rubio
show 11 more authors
Philipp Weidenkaff Ingo Deppner Pierre-Alain Loizeau Jochen Fr\"uhauf David Emschermann Florian Seck David Tlusty Dongdong Hu Yongjie Sun Tonko Ljubicic Yi Wang
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 20:50 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.ins-det nucl-ex
keywords endcap time-of-flightSTAR experimentfixed-target collisionsparticle identificationtime resolutionbeam energy scan
0
0 comments X

The pith

The endcap time-of-flight detector achieved 70 ps time resolution and 70% PID efficiency in STAR fixed-target collisions.

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

The paper describes the installation and performance of an endcap time-of-flight subsystem added to the STAR experiment to enable particle identification during the fixed-target portion of the beam energy scan phase II. This addition extended the accessible center-of-mass energies down to 3.0 GeV, a range unreachable with colliding beams. The authors detail the detector geometry, acceptance, calibration procedures, hit reconstruction, and identification methods, reporting that the system met its targets. A reader would care because the timing precision supports studies of heavy-ion collisions at higher baryon densities where new features of nuclear matter may appear.

Core claim

The eTOF subsystem achieved a time resolution of about 70 ps and a particle identification efficiency of about 70 percent, meeting the design goals of the project for the fixed-target program.

What carries the argument

The adapted endcap time-of-flight detector system including its geometrical layout, acceptance, calibration, hit reconstruction, and particle identification techniques.

If this is right

  • The subsystem enables mid-rapidity particle identification for fixed-target collisions at RHIC.
  • It extends the beam energy scan to center-of-mass energies from 3.0 to 7.7 GeV.
  • The performance validates adaptation of CBM readout electronics for use at STAR.
  • Data collected supports detailed analyses of particle spectra and collective flow at low collision energies.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The successful adaptation suggests similar detector modules could be deployed quickly at other low-energy facilities.
  • Longer-term data taking could reveal whether timing resolution degrades under sustained high-rate fixed-target operation.
  • The quoted efficiencies set a baseline for planning upgrades that target even lower energies or higher multiplicities.

Load-bearing premise

The reported time resolution and PID efficiency after calibration and reconstruction accurately represent detector performance across all data-taking conditions without major unaccounted systematic effects from the fixed-target environment.

What would settle it

A direct comparison of the 70 ps resolution against independent measurements from known particle masses or Monte Carlo simulations matched to the exact fixed-target geometry and beam energies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.16828 by Daniel Cebra, David Emschermann, David Tlusty, Dongdong Hu, Esteban Rubio, Florian Seck, Frank Geurts, Geary Eppley, Ingo Deppner, Jochen Fr\"uhauf, Mathias C. Labont\'e, Norbert Herrmann, Philipp Weidenkaff, Pierre-Alain Loizeau, Tonko Ljubicic, Yannick S\"ohngen, Yi Wang, Yongjie Sun, Zachary Sweger.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic of the STAR central barrel. The TPC provides the momentum [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Left: Photograph of the eTOF wheel (not fully installed). Modules are arranged [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Schematic layout of the eTOF detector. (a): full wheel structure composed of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Scematic drawing of the MRPC3b used at eTOF. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Schematic depiction of the eTOF readout chain and its components. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Overview of match cases. (1) hit matched to a track intersection with a distance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Sketch of the possible states of a GET4 pair. Top left: digi time minus expected [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: STAR eTOF measurements in Au+Au collisions at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Mass distribution as a function of momentum of positive particles measured by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Time resolution of all 108 counters for double-sided matches (red), on average [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Time resolution dependence on matching distance. The time resolution is more dependent on the distance of the hit to the matched track (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Proton matching efficiency as function of rapidity and transverse momentum. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: eTOF efficiency for protons as a function of transverse momentum. Also shown [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Upper panel: eTOF measurements of mass distributions for negative particles [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: (a): dE/dx as a function of (βγ) −2 . Red lines indicate cuts that are imple￾mented to extract the signal in (b - d). Above the red lines are bands associated with charge two and charge three tracks. Below the red line is background from erroneous matches with tracks containing poor timing information. (b - d): Mass distributions for positively charged particles at p = 1 GeV/c extracted by eTOF using diff… view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Blue diamonds: fraction of events remaining in the event sample after masking [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_17.png] view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Acceptance and particle identification techniques used in the STAR critical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_18.png] view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Acceptance overlap between collider and FXT configurations at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_19.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The STAR experiment at RHIC at Brookhaven National Laboratory completed the installation of an endcap time-of-flight subsystem (eTOF) in February 2019. The eTOF subsystem provided essential mid-rapidity particle identification (PID) for the fixed-target (FXT) portion of phase II of the beam energy scan (BES II). The FXT program allowed BES II to include center-of-mass energies from $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}} = 3.0$ GeV to $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}} = 7.7$ GeV, not accessible by colliding beams. The eTOF detectors and readout electronics were designed for the CBM experiment at FAIR and adapted for use at STAR. In this paper, we describe the details of the system in terms of geometrical layout, acceptance, calibration, hit reconstruction, and particle identification. The system achieved a time resolution of about 70 ps and a PID efficiency of about 70\%, meeting the design goals of the project.

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 paper presents the performance of the Endcap Time-of-Flight (eTOF) detector installed in the STAR experiment for the fixed-target portion of the Beam Energy Scan II. It covers the geometrical layout, acceptance, calibration, hit reconstruction, and particle identification procedures. The system is reported to have achieved a time resolution of about 70 ps and a PID efficiency of about 70%, meeting the design goals for mid-rapidity PID in collisions at center-of-mass energies from 3.0 to 7.7 GeV.

Significance. If validated, these results confirm the successful integration and operation of the adapted CBM eTOF detectors in the STAR fixed-target environment. This enables critical particle identification for the low-energy range of the BES II program, which is not accessible via collider mode, thereby supporting key physics measurements in heavy-ion collisions at RHIC. The empirical nature of the metrics provides direct validation of the detector technology.

major comments (1)
  1. [Performance evaluation] The headline performance metrics of ~70 ps time resolution and ~70% PID efficiency are presented without explicit studies or plots showing their dependence on beam energy, event multiplicity, or hit position within the endcap. Given the differences in track angles and backgrounds in the fixed-target setup compared to collider running, this omission makes it difficult to assess if the quoted values are representative across the full range of data-taking conditions from 3 to 7.7 GeV.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract uses approximate values ('about 70 ps' and 'about 70%') without cross-referencing the precise measurements or figures in the main text.
  2. [Methods] Additional details on the error analysis or systematic uncertainties in the time resolution measurement would strengthen the presentation.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comment and the recommendation for minor revision. We address the point below and will incorporate additional studies into the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Performance evaluation] The headline performance metrics of ~70 ps time resolution and ~70% PID efficiency are presented without explicit studies or plots showing their dependence on beam energy, event multiplicity, or hit position within the endcap. Given the differences in track angles and backgrounds in the fixed-target setup compared to collider running, this omission makes it difficult to assess if the quoted values are representative across the full range of data-taking conditions from 3 to 7.7 GeV.

    Authors: We agree that explicit studies of the performance metrics as functions of beam energy, event multiplicity, and hit position would provide a more complete assessment, particularly given the fixed-target geometry. In the revised manuscript we will add figures showing the time resolution versus hit position within the endcap and the PID efficiency versus beam energy and multiplicity, using the full set of BES-II FXT data from 3.0 to 7.7 GeV. These additions will demonstrate that the headline values of approximately 70 ps and 70% are representative across the reported range. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in empirical performance metrics

full rationale

The manuscript reports measured detector performance (time resolution ~70 ps, PID efficiency ~70%) extracted directly from calibration, hit reconstruction, and data analysis in the STAR FXT environment. These quantities are empirical observables obtained from the detector response itself rather than quantities derived via equations, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or self-citation chains. No load-bearing step reduces by construction to its own inputs; the central claims rest on experimental data and are self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central performance claims rest on standard time-of-flight identification principles and empirical calibration procedures rather than new theoretical constructs or free parameters.

axioms (1)
  • standard math Standard time-of-flight relation between measured flight time, momentum, and particle mass for identification.
    The PID method relies on the basic kinematic relation v = p / sqrt(p^2 + m^2) combined with measured time of flight.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5563 in / 1170 out tokens · 18440 ms · 2026-05-15T20:50:15.283996+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

36 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    An Experimental Exploration of the QCD Phase Diagram: The Search for the Critical Point and the Onset of De-confinement

    M. Aggarwal, et al., An experimental exploration of the qcd phase dia- gram: the search for the critical point and the onset of de-confinement (2010).doi:arXiv:1007.2613

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  2. [2]

    Adamczyk, et al., Bulk Properties of the Medium Produced in Rel- ativistic Heavy-Ion Collisions from the Beam Energy Scan Program, Phys

    L. Adamczyk, et al., Bulk Properties of the Medium Produced in Rel- ativistic Heavy-Ion Collisions from the Beam Energy Scan Program, Phys. Rev. C 96 (2017) 044904.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.96.044904

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.96.044904 2017

  3. [3]

    K. H. Ackermann, et al., STAR detector overview, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 499 (2003) 624–632.doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(02)01960-5

    work page doi:10.1016/s0168-9002(02)01960-5 2003

  4. [4]

    W. J. Llope, Multigap RPCs in the STAR experiment at RHIC, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 661 (2012) S110–S113.doi:10.1016/j.nima.2010. 07.086

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nima.2010 2012

  5. [5]

    STAR-CBM eTOF Group, Physics Program for the STAR/CBM eTOF Upgrade (2016).arXiv:1609.05102. 29

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  6. [6]

    Anderson, et al., The STAR time projection chamber: a unique tool for studying high multiplicity events at RHIC, Nucl

    M. Anderson, et al., The STAR time projection chamber: a unique tool for studying high multiplicity events at RHIC, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 499 (2003) 659–678.doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(02)01964-2

    work page doi:10.1016/s0168-9002(02)01964-2 2003

  7. [7]

    Yang, The STAR beam energy scan phase II physics and upgrades, Nucl

    C. Yang, The STAR beam energy scan phase II physics and upgrades, Nucl. Phys. A 967 (2017) 800–803.doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2017. 05.042

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2017 2017

  8. [8]

    Shen, et al., MWPC prototyping and performance test for the STAR inner TPC upgrade, Nucl

    F. Shen, et al., MWPC prototyping and performance test for the STAR inner TPC upgrade, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 896 (2018) 90–95.doi: 10.1016/j.nima.2018.04.019

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nima.2018.04.019 2018

  9. [9]

    STAR Collaboration, Technical Design Report for the iTPC Upgrade, Tech. Rep. STAR Note 644 (2015). URLhttps://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/files/TDRiTPCUpgrade_ final.pdf

    work page 2015

  10. [10]

    Fonte, C

    P. Fonte, C. Williams, A. Smirnitsky, A new high resolution time-of- flight technology, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 443 (2000) 201–204.doi: 10.1016/S0168-9002(99)01217-6

    work page doi:10.1016/s0168-9002(99)01217-6 2000

  11. [11]

    Deppner, et al., The CBM time-of-flight wall, Nucl

    I. Deppner, et al., The CBM time-of-flight wall, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 661 (2012) S121–S124.doi:10.1016/j.nima.2010.09.165

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nima.2010.09.165 2012

  12. [12]

    Deppner, N

    I. Deppner, N. Herrmann, The CBM Time-of-Flight system, JINST 14 (2019) C09020.doi:10.1088/1748-0221/14/09/C09020

    work page doi:10.1088/1748-0221/14/09/c09020 2019

  13. [13]

    J.-B. Wang, et al., Development of multi-gap resistive plate chambers with low-resistive silicate glass electrodes for operation at high particle fluxes and large transported charges, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 621 (2010) 151–156.doi:10.1016/j.nima.2010.04.056

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nima.2010.04.056 2010

  14. [14]

    K. Wang, J. Zhou, X. Wang, X. Li, D. Hu, Y. Sun, Batch testing and noise rate optimization of MRPC3b for CBM-TOF/STAR-eTOF, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 1057 (2023) 168778.doi:10.1016/j.nima.2023. 168778

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nima.2023 2023

  15. [15]

    Zhou, et al., MRPC3b for CBM-TOF, JINST 14 (2019) C06008.doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/14/06/C06008

    J. Zhou, et al., MRPC3b for CBM-TOF, JINST 14 (2019) C06008.doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/14/06/C06008. 30

    work page doi:10.1088/1748-0221/14/06/c06008 2019

  16. [16]

    Hu, et al., MRPC3b mass production for CBM-TOF and eTOF at STAR, JINST 14 (2019) C06013.doi:10.1088/1748-0221/14/06/ C06013

    D. Hu, et al., MRPC3b mass production for CBM-TOF and eTOF at STAR, JINST 14 (2019) C06013.doi:10.1088/1748-0221/14/06/ C06013

    work page doi:10.1088/1748-0221/14/06/ 2019

  17. [17]

    Ciobanu, et al., New Models of PADI, an Ultrafast Preampli- fier–Discriminator ASIC for Time-of-Flight Measurements, IEEE Trans

    M. Ciobanu, et al., New Models of PADI, an Ultrafast Preampli- fier–Discriminator ASIC for Time-of-Flight Measurements, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 68 (2021) 1325–1333.doi:10.1109/TNS.2021.3073487

    work page doi:10.1109/tns.2021.3073487 2021

  18. [19]

    Deppe, H

    H. Deppe, H. Flemming, CBM-Collaboration, The gsi event-driven tdc with 4 channels get4, Verhandlungen der Deutschen Physikalischen Gesellschaft (2010).doi:10.1109/NSSMIC.2009.5401741

    work page doi:10.1109/nssmic.2009.5401741 2010

  19. [20]

    J. D. Cuvelant, et al., Technical design report for the CBM online systems – part i, DAQ and FLES entry stage, Tech. Rep. GSI-2023- 00739, GSI Helmholtz Centre for Heavy Ion Research (2023).doi: 10.15120/GSI-2023-00739

    work page doi:10.15120/gsi-2023-00739 2023

  20. [21]

    Al-Turany, D

    M. Al-Turany, D. Klein, T. Kollegger, A. Rybalchenko, N. Winckler, Fairmq (2018).doi:10.5281/ZENODO.3362435. URLhttps://zenodo.org/record/3362435

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.3362435 2018

  21. [22]

    Bichsel, Straggling in thin silicon detectors, Rev

    H. Bichsel, Straggling in thin silicon detectors, Rev. Mod. Phys. 60 (1988) 663–699.doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.60.663

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.60.663 1988

  22. [23]

    Bichsel, A method to improve tracking and particle identification in TPCs and silicon detectors, Nucl

    H. Bichsel, A method to improve tracking and particle identification in TPCs and silicon detectors, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 562 (2006) 154–197. doi:10.1016/j.nima.2006.03.009

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nima.2006.03.009 2006

  23. [24]

    Bethe, Braking formula for electrons of relativistic speed, Eur

    H. Bethe, Braking formula for electrons of relativistic speed, Eur. Phys. J. H 39 (2014) 537–542.doi:10.1140/epjh/e2014-50028-5

    work page doi:10.1140/epjh/e2014-50028-5 2014

  24. [25]

    Stephanov, K

    M. Stephanov, K. Rajagopal, E. Shuryak, Event-by-event fluctuations in heavy ion collisions and the QCD critical point, Phys. Rev. D 60 (1999) 114028.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.60.114028

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.60.114028 1999

  25. [26]

    Gupta, et al., Scale for the phase diagram of quantum chromodynam- ics, Science 332 (2011) 1525–1528.doi:10.1126/science.1204621

    S. Gupta, et al., Scale for the phase diagram of quantum chromodynam- ics, Science 332 (2011) 1525–1528.doi:10.1126/science.1204621. 31

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1204621 2011

  26. [28]

    Braun-Munzinger, J

    P. Braun-Munzinger, J. Stachel, J. P. Wessels, N. Xu, Thermal equili- bration and expansion in nucleus-nucleus collisions at the AGS, Phys. Lett. B 344 (1995) 43–48.doi:10.1016/0370-2693(94)01534-J

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(94)01534-j 1995

  27. [29]

    Cassing, E

    W. Cassing, E. L. Bratkovskaya, Hadronic and electromagnetic probes of hot and dense nuclear matter, Phys. Rept. 308 (1999) 65–233.doi: 10.1016/S0370-1573(98)00028-3

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370-1573(98)00028-3 1999

  28. [30]

    Y. B. Ivanov, Baryon Stopping in Heavy-Ion Collisions atElab = 2– 160 GeV/nucleon, Phys. Lett. B 690 (2010) 358–361.doi:10.1016/j. physletb.2010.05.051

    work page doi:10.1016/j 2010

  29. [31]

    Y. B. Ivanov, Alternative Scenarios of Relativistic Heavy-Ion Collisions: I. Baryon Stopping, Phys. Rev. C 87 (2013) 064904.doi:10.1103/ PhysRevC.87.064904

    work page 2013

  30. [32]

    Y. B. Ivanov, D. Blaschke, Baryon Stopping in Heavy-Ion Collisions at Elab = 2A–200A GeV, Eur. Phys. J. A 52 (2016) 237.doi:10.1140/ epja/i2016-16237-4

    work page 2016

  31. [33]

    Y. B. Ivanov, D. Blaschke, Robustness of the Baryon-Stopping Signal for the Onset of Deconfinement in Relativistic Heavy-Ion Collisions, Phys. Rev. C 92 (2015) 024916.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.92.024916

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.92.024916 2015

  32. [34]

    Ahle, et al., An Excitation Function ofK− andK + Production in Au+Au Reactions at the AGS, Phys

    L. Ahle, et al., An Excitation Function ofK− andK + Production in Au+Au Reactions at the AGS, Phys. Lett. B 476 (2000) 1–10.doi: 10.1016/S0370-2693(00)00916-3

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(00)00916-3 2000

  33. [35]

    and others, Energy Dependence of Pion and Kaon Production in Central Pb+Pb Collisions, Phys

    Alt, C. and others, Energy Dependence of Pion and Kaon Production in Central Pb+Pb Collisions, Phys. Rev. C 77 (2008) 024903.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.77.024903

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.77.024903 2008

  34. [36]

    I. G. Bearden, et al., Strange Meson Enhancement in PbPb Collisions, Phys. Lett. B 471 (1999) 6–12.doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(99)01327-1

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(99)01327-1 1999

  35. [37]

    J. L. Klay, et al., Longitudinal Flow of Protons from 2-8 AGeV Cen- tral Au+Au Collisions, Phys. Rev. C 65 (2002) 044902.doi:10.1103/ PhysRevC.65.044902. 32

    work page 2002

  36. [38]

    Ahle, et al., Centrality dependence of kaon yields in Si + A and Au + Au collisions at relativistic energies, Phys

    L. Ahle, et al., Centrality dependence of kaon yields in Si + A and Au + Au collisions at relativistic energies, Phys. Rev. C 60 (1999) 044904. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.60.044904. 33

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.60.044904 1999