Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 39 references

Growth of quartet correlations in neutron-rich Tellurium isotopes within quartet Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer theory

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Adding valence neutrons to tellurium isotopes strengthens four-nucleon quartet correlations, shifting the two valence protons out of pair-like and into quartet-like configurations.

desk verdict A clean, honest qBCS study with a robust proton-occupation signature; the neutron trend needs a larger-space test before it becomes more than a finite-space statement. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.15700 v2 pith:K4AT34DS submitted 2026-07-17 nucl-th cond-mat.quant-gasphysics.atom-phquant-ph

Yixin Guo , Hiroyuki Sagawa , Masaaki Kimura This is my paper · ORCID
classification nucl-thcond-mat.quant-gasphysics.atom-phquant-ph
keywords quartetBCStheoryneutron-richtelluriumisotopesisovectorpairingfour-nucleoncorrelationsnuclear100Sninertcorealpha-likeclusteringvariationalmany-body
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 in neutron-rich tellurium isotopes above the doubly magic tin-100 core, the two valence protons and a growing number of valence neutrons do not merely form independent proton and neutron Cooper pairs. Instead, as neutrons are added, the ground state develops an increasing share of four-body 'quartet' correlations in which two neutrons and two protons act together. This is shown through a quartet Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer wave function that treats pair and quartet amplitudes on the same footing. If correct, the result would mean neutron excess itself acts as a switch that redistributes proton correlations from pairing to alpha-like four-body clustering, a mechanism that could matter for understanding alpha decay and clustering near the proton drip line. In the model the trend is monotonic: the quartet number, condensed quartet number, and quartet-induced energy gain all grow smoothly as the valence neutron number rises from two to fourteen.

What carries the argument

The central object is the quartet BCS trial wave function, a product over all pairs of time-reversed orbitals ('blocks'), each block carrying three amplitudes: an empty amplitude u_b, isovector pair amplitudes v_{b,T3}, and a quartet amplitude w_b that creates a four-nucleon npnp configuration from two J=0, T=1 pairs. The key identity is the quartet creation operator α†_{r1r2}, which combines neutron-neutron, proton-proton, and neutron-proton pair operators with signs that produce a coherent npnp block. The variational equations for u, v, w, with neutron and proton chemical potentials fixing particle numbers, are solved self-consistently, and the block structure lets pair and quartet correla

What would settle it

Recompute the qBCS ground state of 104Te through 116Te in an enlarged valence space that adds the 3s1/2, 2d3/2, and 1h11/2 neutron orbits; if N_Q or ΔE_quartet stops growing monotonically once the space is not saturated near N_val = 14, the claimed neutron-driven quartet enhancement is an artifact of the finite model space rather than a physical trend.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that in the qBCS ground state of Te isotopes with two valence protons, the weight of four-nucleon npnp configurations grows monotonically as the valence neutron number climbs from 2 to 14, while the weight of pure proton-pair configurations falls. The paper extracts this from the variational qBCS amplitudes: the valence quartet number N_Q = Σ m_b w_b² rises monotonically, the condensed quartet number behaves the same way, the quartet-induced energy gain grows from about 0.05 MeV to about 0.4–0.45 MeV (roughly 1% to 2.8% of the correlation energy), and the proton 1g7/2 occupation is pushed close to the degeneracy-weighted limit 4/7. The interpretation is that added neutro

Load-bearing premise

The calculation's load-bearing premise is that the reduced two-orbital valence space (2d5/2 plus 1g7/2, holding at most fourteen neutrons) faithfully represents how the ground state changes with neutron number; since the last computed isotope fills that space completely, part of the monotonic growth may simply reflect the finite capacity of the space.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In neutron-rich Te isotopes, neutron excess at fixed proton number enhances four-nucleon correlations, so valence neutrons are not simply spectators for pairing; they reshape the proton sector.
  • The fixed proton weight is redistributed: proton pair-like components decline while quartet components grow almost linearly with N_val, implying proton pairing and quartet correlations compete under neutron addition.
  • The proton 1g7/2 occupation saturates near the degeneracy-weighted 4/7 limit in qBCS, whereas conventional factorized BCS keeps it lower; this is a testable difference between the two descriptions.
  • The quartet-induced energy gain, though small (up to about 0.45 MeV, about 2.8% of correlation energy), grows monotonically, so explicit four-body correlations become increasingly important toward neutron-rich 116Te.
  • The result suggests that extending qBCS along wider isotopic chains could reveal where neutron excess drives a crossover from pair-dominated to quartet-enhanced regimes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Inference: Because N_val = 14 exactly fills the 2d5/2 ⊕ 1g7/2 neutron space, recomputing in an enlarged space (adding, say, 3s1/2, 2d3/2, and 1h11/2) would separate true correlation growth from occupancy-driven filling; the monotonic trend may flatten or even reverse once the space is not saturated.
  • Inference: The same qBCS machinery could be applied to other two-proton isotopes above 100Sn, such as Xe, with the expectation of similar neutron-driven quartet growth; the paper does not make that extension.
  • Inference: A direct observable consequence, if the claim survives in larger spaces, would be a neutron-number dependence in alpha-knockout or alpha-preformation data in this mass region; the paper itself notes that N_Q is not yet connected to such reaction observables.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper applies quartet Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer (qBCS) theory to neutron-rich Te isotopes, taking 100Sn as an inert core and placing two valence protons plus N_val = 2–14 valence neutrons in a 2d5/2 ⊕ 1g7/2 model space. The Hamiltonian is a charge-independent isovector J=0, T=1 pairing interaction with a single strength G, fixed by requiring that the degeneracy-weighted neutron gap Ξ_n match empirical three-point gaps at 112Te and 114Te. The central claim is that adding valence neutrons at fixed proton number enhances the quartet component: the valence quartet number N_Q = Σ_b m_b w_b^2 (Eq. 38) increases monotonically with N_val, as do the condensed quartet number (Eq. 39, not shown) and the quartet-induced energy gain ΔE_quartet (Fig. 3). The proton 1g7/2 occupation is driven near the degeneracy-weighted limit 4/7, with the quartet contribution growing while the pair contribution decreases (Fig. 4). The paper interprets this as evidence that neutron excess redistributes the fixed proton weight from pair-like to quartet-like configurations, and explicitly frames the study as a first step in a truncated valence space.

Significance. If the reported trend is physically robust, the paper would be a valuable demonstration that qBCS-type variational states can describe the emergence of four-body correlations in neutron-rich finite nuclei and that neutron excess can actively participate in, rather than merely dilute, isovector quartet correlations. The manuscript's strengths include a transparent variational derivation (Eqs. 22–32), a clearly disclosed calibration strategy with a genuine uncertainty window (G = −1.08…−1.12 MeV), and explicit statements of the model's limitations in Sec. IV. The authors also show insensitivity of the headline quantities to G within the adopted window (Figs. 2 and 3). However, the central neutron-number trend may be substantially contaminated by finite-space saturation, because the model space closes exactly at the last computed point (N_val = 14). This concern is sufficiently load-bearing that the main interpretive claim cannot be accepted without additional analysis.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. III, Fig. 2 and Eq. (38); Sec. I abstract] The central claim—that adding valence neutrons enhances quartet correlations—rests on the monotonic growth of N_Q = Σ_b m_b w_b^2 from N_val = 2 to 14. However, the two-orbital space 2d5/2 ⊕ 1g7/2 has exactly seven time-reversed pair labels, i.e., a neutron capacity of 14, and the chain endpoint 116Te sits precisely at N_val = 14. As the neutron chemical potential rises, more blocks become energetically available for nonzero amplitudes simply because the finite space is progressively filled. The paper never separates this occupancy-driven growth from an intrinsic correlation-driven growth (e.g., an average quartet amplitude per open block, or a ratio of N_Q to the number of active blocks). Equation (46) is a degeneracy-weighted saturation argument only for the proton 1g7/2 occupation, not for N_Q or ΔE_quartet. The authors also state that N_cond_Q (Eq. 39) behaves the same but do not sho
  2. [Sec. III, Eqs. (33)–(37) and Fig. 1] The effective pairing strength G is calibrated using only two anchor points, 112Te and 114Te, with the stated criterion that Ξ_n falls in the empirical interval 1.2–1.4 MeV. Figure 1 shows the calculated Ξ_n for the three G values but does not overlay the empirical odd-even staggering indicators for the whole chain. Since the paper later extrapolates G to 104Te and 116Te, a direct comparison of theory and experiment at every computed isotope would establish whether the single G actually reproduces the empirical trend or only happens to pass through two points. This is not a fatal flaw, but it is needed to support the claim that the model captures the neutron-number evolution rather than a calibration artifact.
  3. [Sec. II, Eq. (7) and Sec. IV] The trial state (7) restricts each block to at most one quartet amplitude w_b and at most one pair amplitude per isospin channel, and the Hamiltonian (1) includes only same-orbit time-reversed J=0, T=1 pairs. The authors acknowledge isoscalar pairing and cross-orbital pairs are omitted. This is acceptable for a first-step study, but the omission is not neutral for the central claim: the quartet operator in Eq. (6) is built specifically from isovector T=1 pairs, so the resulting 'quartet' is an α-like combination of two isovector pairs. The energy gain ΔE_quartet in Eq. (40) measures the gain from allowing this particular w amplitude, not from all possible four-body correlations. The manuscript should state more sharply that the reported enhancement is a statement about isovector-pair-based quartets in a restricted space, not about general α-like collectivity.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. III, Eq. (40) and surrounding text] The sentence beginning 'while EqCSF noQ is obtained by constraining the quartet amplitude to zero, namely w_b = 0, but retainkeeping' contains a typo ('retainkeeping') and an incomplete clause. Also, the phrase 'the same quartet BCS block structure' appears abruptly; clarify how the constrained state is normalized and whether the pair amplitudes are re-optimized under the constraint.
  2. [References] References [36] and [37] are identical (Changizi, Qi, Wyss, Nucl. Phys. A940, 210 (2015)). Please remove the duplicate and renumber.
  3. [Sec. II, Eq. (6)] The quartet operator normalization includes 1/√3 and 1/√(1+δ). It might help to state explicitly that this choice gives ⟨0|α α†|0⟩ = 1 for both diagonal and off-diagonal blocks, so that the variational amplitudes have a uniform probability interpretation.
  4. [Sec. III, Eq. (39)] Since N_cond_Q is introduced but not plotted, either show it in a figure or remove the parenthetical statement. A curve would also help readers judge whether the coherence (u^2 w^2) grows beyond what mere occupation of blocks would produce.
  5. [Abstract and Sec. IV] The phrase 'These results suggest that additional valence neutrons enhance the quartet admixture' is appropriately hedged, but the body text occasionally states the conclusion more categorically (e.g., 'the additional neutrons do not merely fill independent neutron-pair configurations'). Given the finite-space caveat, softening the categorical phrasing in Sec. III would be more accurate.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the fitted pairing strength is decoupled from the central outputs, which are shown to be insensitive to the fitted window, and the qBCS variational derivation is performed in-paper; the finite-space saturation concern is a stated limitation, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained and the headline outputs are not fed back into the calibration. The single fitted parameter, the isovector pairing strength G, is fixed from empirical neutron pairing gaps via Eqs. (36)-(37) (Xi_n(112Te)≈1.30 MeV, Xi_n(114Te)≈1.39 MeV), and the paper explicitly demonstrates that the central results — N_Q (Eq. 38), DeltaE_quartet (Eq. 40), R_Q (Eq. 41), and the proton occupation decomposition (Eqs. 42-45) — are nearly flat across the adopted G window (G = -1.08 to -1.12 MeV), so the neutron-number trend is not forced by the fit (Figs. 2-5). Neither N_Q nor DeltaE_quartet appears in the gap-calibration condition, so there is no fitted-input-called-prediction reduction. The quartet amplitudes w_b are true variational outcomes of the self-consistent system (28)-(29) subject to the per-block normalization (9) and the particle-number constraints (31)-(32); they are not defined in terms of N_val, and the monotonic increase of N_Q = Sum_b m_b w_b^2 is computed, not assumed. Self-citations ([20], [22], [24]) are contextual (prior applications of qBCS to matter and N=Z surfaces) and are not used to justify any step in the Sec. II derivation, which is carried out explicitly in the paper. The one caveat worth weighing is the truncated-space concern: the model space 2d5/2 + 1g7/2 has neutron capacity exactly 14 (seven time-reversed pair labels), so the chain endpoint 116Te (N_val=14) coincides with full neutron occupancy, and the paper does not decompose the growth of N_Q into occupancy-driven versus correlation-driven parts. This is a robustness/falsifiability limitation — the paper itself concedes it is 'a first step in a truncated valence space' (Sec. IV) and that quantitative comparison with knockout observables requires larger spaces — but it is not a circular reduction, since nothing in the variational equations makes the trend true by definition, and the central claim is explicitly scoped 'within the present quartet BCS variational space.' Hence no circular step rises to the standard of Eq. X = Eq. Y by construction; the score reflects only the presence of non-load-bearing self-citations and this caveat, which is a matter of model breadth, not derivation circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The computation has exactly one numerically fitted parameter, G, anchored at two of the seven isotopes; everything else is assumed model structure. The leading unchecked assumptions are the two-orbital truncation (neutron capacity 14, saturated precisely at the chain endpoint 116Te), the proton–neutron degenerate 0.172 MeV spacing taken from 101Sn, the restriction to same-orbit T=1 pairs with isoscalar pairing dropped, and expectation-value particle-number constraints without projection. No new physical entities are introduced; N_Q, N_cond_Q, and Ξ_p are model diagnostics, not new particles or forces.

free parameters (1)
  • G (charge-independent isovector pairing strength) = -1.10 MeV (window -1.08 to -1.12 MeV)
    Calibrated so that the degeneracy-weighted neutron gap Ξ_n reproduces the empirical three-point staggering of 112Te (≈1.30 MeV) and 114Te (≈1.39 MeV) within the empirical 1.2–1.4 MeV band from AME2020 masses (Eqs. 36–37). Kept fixed along the chain and applied to protons via charge independence.
assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption 100Sn is an inert core; valence protons and neutrons occupy only the 2d5/2 ⊕ 1g7/2 shells
    Fixes the Hilbert space; excludes core polarization and orbitals beyond g7/2 (e.g., 3s1/2, 2d3/2, 1h11/2) that are physically occupied for neutron number up to 64. Sec. II: 'we take 100Sn as an inert core...' and the model-space paragraph.
  • domain assumption Same relative single-particle spacing for neutrons and protons: ε_d5/2 = 0, ε_g7/2 = 0.172 MeV
    Taken from experimental single-neutron states in 101Sn (Ref. [33]) and applied to both species; a constant n–p shift is absorbed into chemical potentials, but different proton spacings are not tested. Sec. II.
  • domain assumption Charge-independent isovector J=0, T=1 pairing with constant G; same-orbit time-reversed pairs only
    Isoscalar proton–neutron pairing and cross-orbital pair operators are dropped; inter-orbital coupling enters only through pair-scattering matrix elements. Acknowledged in Sec. II as possibly affecting absolute amplitudes near N=Z.
  • domain assumption The quartet operator (Eq. 6) is the T=0 combination of the three T=1 two-pair channels and exhausts the four-body correlations
    Adopted from the quartet-condensation literature (Refs. 15–19); no other four-body angular-momentum channels are allowed in the trial state.
  • domain assumption The product ansatz (Eq. 7) with per-block normalization (Eq. 9) and expectation-value particle-number constraints treats Pauli blocking and number conservation approximately
    Acknowledged in Secs. II and IV: 'the qBCS state is not an eigenstate of the particle-number operators'; particle-number restoration is listed as future work before quantitative comparisons.
  • domain assumption The three-point odd-even mass staggering Δn^(3) (Eq. 36) from AME2020 is a valid proxy for the neutron pairing gap, and the 1.2–1.4 MeV chain scale is representative
    Follows Ref. [37] (Changizi–Qi–Wyss); this anchors the entire calibration. Sec. III.
  • domain assumption The gap scale calibrated at 112Te and 114Te (away from the proton dripline) extrapolates as a constant G toward the dripline at 104Te
    Explicitly described as 'an extrapolation of the same finite-space interaction toward the dripline.' Sec. III.
  • standard math Standard second-quantized quasi-spin algebra and variational calculus underlying the BCS gap equations
    The Routhian minimization (Eqs. 23–30), the gap-like order parameters (Eq. 24), and the particle-number formulas (Eqs. 31–32) assume conventional fermion algebra with time-reversed pairs.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Growth of quartet correlations in neutron-rich Tellurium isotopes within quartet Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer theory." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/K4AT34DS

@misc{pith2026260715700,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Growth of quartet correlations in neutron-rich Tellurium isotopes within quartet Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer theory},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/K4AT34DS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.15700}
}
abstract

Quartet correlations in neutron-rich Te isotopes are investigated within the quartet Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer (BCS) framework. Taking $^{100}$Sn as an inert core, we consider two valence protons and valence neutrons occupying the $2d_{5/2} \oplus 1g_{7/2}$ model space, and solve the quartet BCS variational equations with a charge-independent isovector pairing interaction. The effective pairing strength is constrained from empirical neutron pairing gaps in the Te isotopic chain. We find that the valence quartet number increases as the valence neutron number is enlarged from $N_{\rm val}=2$ to $14$. The same increasing behavior is also found for the condensed quartet component. The proton occupation of the $1g_{7/2}$ orbit is strongly enhanced relative to the conventional like-particle BCS reference and is driven close to the degeneracy-weighted limit. These results suggest that additional valence neutrons enhance the quartet admixture in the correlated quartet BCS state, while redistributing the fixed proton weight from pair-like configurations to quartet configurations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.15700 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. The degeneracy-weighted neutron gap Ξ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. The valence quartet number as a function of valence [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (a) Quartet-induced energy gain ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Proton occupation fraction of the 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Proton pairing quantities as functions of valence [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references

  1. [35]

    Satu la, J

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

    1998

  2. [1]

    von Oertzen, M

    W. von Oertzen, M. Freer, and Y. Kanada-En’yo, Nuclear clusters and nuclear molecules, Phys. Rep.432, 43 (2006)

    2006

  3. [2]

    Freer, H

    M. Freer, H. Horiuchi, Y. Kanada-En’yo, D. Lee, and U.- G. Meißner, Microscopic clustering in light nuclei, Rev. Mod. Phys.90, 035004 (2018)

    2018

  4. [3]

    Schuck, Y

    P. Schuck, Y. Funaki, H. Horiuchi, G. Röpke, A. Tohsaki, and T. Yamada, Quartetting in fermionic matter and α- particle condensation in nuclear systems, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.59, 285 (2007), international Workshop on Nuclear Physics 28th Course

    2007

  5. [4]

    Tohsaki, H

    A. Tohsaki, H. Horiuchi, P. Schuck, and G. R¨ opke, Alpha cluster condensation in 12C and 16O, Phys. Rev. Lett.87, 192501 (2001)

    2001

  6. [5]

    Funaki, H

    Y. Funaki, H. Horiuchi, G. R¨ opke, P. Schuck, A. Tohsaki, and T. Yamada, Density-induced suppression of theα- particle condensate in nuclear matter and the structure ofα-cluster states in nuclei, Phys. Rev. C77, 064312 (2008)

    2008

  7. [6]

    R¨ opke, A

    G. R¨ opke, A. Schnell, P. Schuck, and P. Nozi` eres, Four- particle condensate in strongly coupled fermion systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.80, 3177 (1998)

    1998

  8. [7]

    Beyer, S

    M. Beyer, S. Sofianos, C. Kuhrts, G. Röpke, and P. Schuck, Theα-particle in nuclear matter, Phys. Lett. B488, 247 (2000)

    2000

Show all 39 references
  1. [8]

    Typel, G

    S. Typel, G. R¨ opke, T. Kl¨ ahn, D. Blaschke, and H. H. Wolter, Composition and thermodynamics of nuclear matter with light clusters, Phys. Rev. C81, 015803 (2010)

    2010

  2. [9]

    Oertel, M

    M. Oertel, M. Hempel, T. Kl¨ ahn, and S. Typel, Equations of state for supernovae and compact stars, Rev. Mod. Phys.89, 015007 (2017)

    2017

  3. [10]

    Bardeen, L

    J. Bardeen, L. N. Cooper, and J. R. Schrieffer, Theory of superconductivity, Phys. Rev.108, 1175 (1957)

    1957

  4. [11]

    A. Bohr, B. R. Mottelson, and D. Pines, Possible analogy between the excitation spectra of nuclei and those of the superconducting metallic state, Phys. Rev.110, 936 (1958)

    1958

  5. [12]

    Ring and P

    P. Ring and P. Schuck,The Nuclear Many-Body problem (Springer, 2004)

    2004

  6. [13]

    D. J. Dean and M. Hjorth-Jensen, Pairing in nuclear systems: from neutron stars to finite nuclei, Rev. Mod. Phys.75, 607 (2003)

    2003

  7. [14]

    Frauendorf and A

    S. Frauendorf and A. Macchiavelli, Overview of neu- tron–proton pairing, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.78, 24 (2014)

    2014

  8. [15]

    Sandulescu, D

    N. Sandulescu, D. Negrea, J. Dukelsky, and C. W. Johnson, Quartet condensation and isovector pairing correlations inN=Znuclei, Phys. Rev. C85, 061303 (2012)

    2012

  9. [16]

    Sambataro and N

    M. Sambataro and N. Sandulescu, Four-body correlations in nuclei, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 112501 (2015)

    2015

  10. [17]

    Negrea, P

    D. Negrea, P. Buganu, D. Gambacurta, and N. Sand- ulescu, Isovector and isoscalar proton-neutron pairing in N > Znuclei, Phys. Rev. C98, 064319 (2018)

    2018

  11. [18]

    Baran and D

    V. Baran and D. Delion, A quartet bcs-like theory, Phys. Lett. B805, 135462 (2020)

    2020

  12. [19]

    V. V. Baran, D. R. Nichita, D. Negrea, D. S. Delion, N. Sandulescu, and P. Schuck, Bridging the quartet and pair pictures of isovector proton-neutron pairing, Phys. Rev. C102, 061301 (2020)

    2020

  13. [20]

    Y. Guo, H. Tajima, and H. Liang, Cooper quartet correlations in infinite symmetric nuclear matter, Phys. Rev. C105, 024317 (2022)

    2022

  14. [21]

    Y. Guo, H. Tajima, and H. Liang, Biexciton-like quartet condensates in an electron-hole liquid, Phys. Rev. Research4, 023152 (2022)

    2022

  15. [22]

    Y. Guo, T. Naito, H. Tajima, and H. Liang, Quartet correlations near the surface ofN=Znuclei, Phys. Rev. C112, 024310 (2025)

    2025

  16. [23]

    T. Sogo, G. R¨ opke, and P. Schuck, Many-body approach for quartet condensation in strong coupling, Phys. Rev. C81, 064310 (2010)

    2010

  17. [24]

    Y. Guo, H. Tajima, and H. Liang, Comparative study of quartet superfluid state: Quartet bardeen- cooper-schrieffer theory and generalized nambu-gor’kov 9 formalism (2026), arXiv:2601.13825 [nucl-th]

    2026

  18. [25]

    C. B. Hinke, et al., Superallowed gamow–teller decay of the doubly magic nucleus 100Sn, Nature486, 341 (2012)

    2012

  19. [26]

    R. D. Macfarlane and A. Siivola, New region of alpha radioactivity, Phys. Rev. Lett.14, 114 (1965)

    1965

  20. [27]

    S. N. Liddick, R. Grzywacz, C. Mazzocchi, R. D. Page, K. P. Rykaczewski, J. C. Batchelder, C. R. Bingham, I. G. Darby, G. Drafta, C. Goodin, C. J. Gross, J. H. Hamilton, A. A. Hecht, J. K. Hwang, S. Ilyushkin, D. T. Joss, A. Korgul, W. Kr´ olas, K. Lagergren, K. Li, M. N. Tant...

    2006

  21. [28]

    Auranen, D

    K. Auranen, D. Seweryniak, M. Albers, A. D. Ayangeakaa, S. Bottoni, M. P. Carpenter, C. J. Chiara, P. Copp, H. M. David, D. T. Doherty, J. Harker, C. R. Hoffman, R. V. F. Janssens, T. L. Khoo, S. A. Kuvin, T. Lauritsen, G. Lotay, A. M. Rogers, J. Sethi, C. Scholey, R. Talwar, ...

    2018

  22. [29]

    Mohr, Super-allowedαdecay above doubly-magic 100Sn and properties of 104Te = 100Sn⊗α, Eur

    P. Mohr, Super-allowedαdecay above doubly-magic 100Sn and properties of 104Te = 100Sn⊗α, Eur. Phys. J. A31, 23 (2007)

    2007

  23. [30]

    Patial, R

    M. Patial, R. J. Liotta, and R. Wyss, Microscopic description of superallowedα-decay transitions, Phys. Rev. C93, 054326 (2016)

    2016

  24. [31]

    S. Yang, C. Xu, G. R¨ opke, P. Schuck, Z. Ren, Y. Funaki, H. Horiuchi, A. Tohsaki, T. Yamada, and B. Zhou,α decay to a doubly magic core in the quartetting wave function approach, Phys. Rev. C101, 024316 (2020)

    2020

  25. [32]

    Tanaka, Z

    J. Tanaka, Z. Yang, S. Typel, S. Adachi, S. Bai, P. van Beek, D. Beaumel, Y. Fujikawa, J. Han, S. Heil, S. Huang, A. Inoue, Y. Jiang, M. Knösel, N. Kobayashi, Y. Kubota, W. Liu, J. Lou, Y. Maeda, Y. Matsuda, K. Miki, S. Nakamura, K. Ogata, V. Panin, H. Scheit, F. Schindler, P....

    2021

  26. [33]

    Seweryniak, M

    D. Seweryniak, M. P. Carpenter, S. Gros, A. A. Hecht, N. Hoteling, R. V. F. Janssens, T. L. Khoo, T. Lauritsen, C. J. Lister, G. Lotay, D. Peterson, A. P. Robinson, W. B. Walters, X. Wang, P. J. Woods, and S. Zhu, Single- neutron states in 101Sn, Phys. Rev. Lett.99, 022504 (2007)

    2007

  27. [34]

    Bohr and B

    A. Bohr and B. R. Mottelson,Nuclear Structure Volume I: Single-Particle Motion(World Scientific, 1998)

    1998

  28. [37]

    Changizi, C

    S. Changizi, C. Qi, and R. Wyss, Empirical pairing gaps, shell effects, and di-neutron spatial correlation in neutron-rich nuclei, Nucl. Phys. A940, 210 (2015)

    2015

  29. [38]

    M. Wang, W. Huang, F. Kondev, G. Audi, and S. Naimi, The ame 2020 atomic mass evaluation (ii). tables, graphs and references*, Chin. Phys. C45, 030003 (2021)

    2020

  30. [39]

    Nakatsukasa and N

    T. Nakatsukasa and N. Hinohara, Localα-removal strength in the mean-field approximation, Phys. Rev. C 108, 014318 (2023)

    2023

  31. [40]

    Yoshida and J

    K. Yoshida and J. Tanaka, Reaction mechanism of quasi- free knockout processes in the exotic ri beam era, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys.2026, 04A108 (2026)

    2026

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.