Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 55 references

The paper predicts that 12C+12C collisions at 400–600 A MeV produce the charge-exchange-plus-pion channel 12C(12C,12N π+)12Be at cross sections rising from 8.6 to 19.8 nb.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-01 11:17 UTC pith:4BADX7VO

load-bearing objection First UrQMD prediction for the 12C(12C,12N π+)12Be channel, with a genuinely useful background estimate, but the quoted nanobarn cross sections lack systematic uncertainties from the strongly sensitive coalescence parameters. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.19924 v1 pith:4BADX7VO submitted 2026-07-22 nucl-th

Charge-Exchange Reactions Accompanied by a Single π^+ Production in Medium-Energy Heavy-Ion Collisions

Xiao-lei Chen , Jin-yu Yang , Shi-kang Dong , Bao-wei Ding , Bi-tao Hu , Xi-yu Qiu This is my paper
classification nucl-th
keywords charge-exchange reactionpion productionΔ resonanceheavy-ion collisionsphase-space coalescenceUrQMD transport modelrare-isotope production12C(12C,12N π+)12Be
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

Simulating 1.44×10^9 collisions of 12C on 12C, the paper predicts that the charge-exchange channel 12C(12C,12N π+)12Be has cross sections of 8.58, 15.84, and 19.80 nanobarns at 400, 500, and 600 A MeV, rising monotonically with beam energy. It argues that this is a nontrivial hadronic channel in which charge exchange and Δ-resonance pion production can be studied in the same reaction, extending earlier lepton-induced work. The 12N fragment emerges as a peripheral, projectile-dominated product with forward-peaked kinematics, while the single π+ is low-momentum, quasi-isotropic, and backward-enhanced in the center-of-mass frame, which the paper attributes to Δ decay rather than direct production. If the predictions hold, the reaction gives experimenters a concrete rate target and a way to probe isospin transfer and resonance dynamics in a many-body environment.

Core claim

The central claim is that in 400–600 A MeV 12C+12C collisions a measurable, background-controllable reaction occurs in which the projectile turns into 12N, the target into 12Be, and exactly one π+ is emitted. From 1.44×10^9 simulated events the model finds 13, 24, and 30 such events at the three energies, giving cross sections of 8.58±2.38, 15.84±3.23, and 19.80±3.61 nb. The paper further claims the final-state kinematics separate the two mechanisms: 12N retains almost the full projectile momentum, is emitted within about 2.5 degrees of the beam, and has rapidity at most 0.03 below the beam, while the pion sits near mid-rapidity with broad, backward-enhanced angular distributions and nearly

What carries the argument

The machinery is the ultra-relativistic quantum molecular dynamics (UrQMD) transport model, a many-body simulation of nucleons as Gaussian wave packets with stochastic collisions and resonance excitation, followed by a phase-space coalescence filter that groups nearby final-state nucleons into fragments. The cross section is obtained from the event count via σ = A_reaction N/N_total with impact parameters sampled geometrically up to 5.5 fm. The kinematic argument rests on comparing the reconstructed 12N and π+ four-momenta: the near-projectile rapidity of 12N and the mid-rapidity, backward-enhanced pion angular distributions are the evidence that separates peripheral single charge exchange f

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the hand-chosen coalescence parameters (p0=0.25 GeV/c, r_pp=2.8 fm, r_nn=r_np=3.8 fm) reconstruct the true 12N+12Be+π+ event rate from the simulated final states; the paper's own Fig. 2 shows the production probability rises significantly with r0, so a different legitimate radius could shift the quoted cross sections.

What would settle it

Measure the 12C(12C,12N π+)12Be cross section at 400, 500, and 600 A MeV using missing-mass selection: if the values fall outside 8.58±2.38, 15.84±3.23, and 19.80±3.61 nb, or fail to rise monotonically with energy, the central prediction is wrong. A cheaper internal check is to rerun the simulation with r0 varied over the paper's own 3–4 fm range; if the event count changes by more than Poisson statistics, the absolute cross sections are not stable.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • If the predicted cross sections are right, 12C(12C,12N π+)12Be should be observable at 400–600 A MeV with a few nanobarns and a monotonic energy rise, giving experimenters a specific rate to aim for.
  • The strong forward peaking of 12N means a detector placed within a few degrees of the beam axis captures most of the fragment yield, while pion detectors must cover a wide angular range including backward angles.
  • The coexistence of charge exchange and Δ decay in one final state lets the same measurement constrain both mechanisms, so the reaction can serve as a hadronic complement to lepton-induced Δ+ studies.
  • The estimated minimum signal-to-background ratios (4.33, 3.81, 2.53) imply that with the proposed missing-mass selection the channel can be isolated, but that background grows with energy.
  • Because the residual 12Be is often accompanied by one or two neutrons in the model, real experiments should expect a multi-fragment target residue and may need neutron detection to keep the channel pure.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: the quoted nanobarn values should be read as order-of-magnitude predictions, not precision numbers; the paper's own sensitivity scan shows the fragment yield grows strongly with the coordinate-space coalescence radius, so a different legitimate parameter choice could shift the cross sections by a factor of several.
  • Editorial inference: if the Δ-decay interpretation is correct, the pion angular distribution should be near-isotropic in the Δ rest frame; a future simulation that tags the parent Δ and plots the pion in that frame would provide a direct, testable check the paper does not perform.
  • Editorial inference: the same reaction framework could be applied to other A=12 systems, for example 12C on 14N or different final isobars, to map isospin-transfer probabilities, and the predicted energy trend could be compared with data from upcoming rare-isotope facilities.
  • Editorial inference: because the 12N ground state is particle-bound with no excited states, a coincident measurement of 12N, π+, and the 12Be missing mass would be unusually clean; a null result at the predicted nb scale would indicate a breakdown of the transport-plus-coalescence description of isospin transfer.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a transport-model calculation of the heavy-ion charge-exchange channel 12C(12C, 12N π+)12Be at 400, 500, and 600 A MeV. Using the UrQMD event generator followed by phase-space coalescence, the authors identify 13, 24, and 30 events in the selected channel and report cross sections of 8.58 ± 2.38, 15.84 ± 3.23, and 19.80 ± 3.61 nb, respectively, with a claimed monotonic increase with beam energy. They further analyze momentum, energy, angular, and rapidity distributions of the final-state 12N and π+, concluding that 12N is formed in peripheral projectile-dominated charge exchange and that the π+ is predominantly produced through Δ-resonance decay. The paper also estimates backgrounds from multi-π+ events and from target-breakup channels using missing-mass arguments.

Significance. If the quantitative predictions are robust, this would be the first transport-model calculation of a heavy-ion charge-exchange channel accompanied by single π+ production, providing rare-isotope production pathways and guidance for future experiments. The paper is honest about its event counts, uses Poisson statistics appropriately, and includes a background analysis. It also makes falsifiable predictions—absolute cross sections and kinematic distributions—that could be tested at medium-energy facilities. However, the central quantitative claim of nanobarn-level cross sections is currently not supported with adequate model-systematic uncertainty, because the absolute normalization depends strongly on the arbitrarily chosen coalescence radius r0.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2.2 and Eq. (8)] The quoted cross sections in Eq. (8) and Fig. 3 are computed with a single set of coalescence parameters, p0 = 0.25 GeV/c, r_pp = 2.8 fm, r_nn = r_np = 3.8 fm. The authors' own sensitivity scan in Fig. 2 shows that the production probability of the A = 12 fragments increases significantly with r0. Since the selected channel requires simultaneous formation of both 12N and 12Be, the channel cross section scales roughly as the product of the two fragment probabilities, amplifying the r0 sensitivity. No systematic uncertainty from r0, p0, or the hard equation of state is propagated into Eq. (8). Given that the authors themselves describe coalescence as a tool for 'order-of-magnitude estimations and trend analysis,' quoting three-significant-figure cross sections with only Poisson errors overstates the precision. Please provide a quantitative systematic band from the parameter scan, or explic
  2. [§3, Fig. 3] The claim of a monotonic increase with incident energy is based on central values with overlapping Poisson errors. From the quoted numbers, the increase from 400 to 500 A MeV is 7.26 ± 4.01 nb (about 1.8σ), and from 500 to 600 A MeV it is 3.96 ± 4.84 nb (less than 1σ). Thus the data do not establish a monotonic trend at a meaningful significance level, especially once the unquantified coalescence-radius uncertainty is included. Please add a significance estimate or state the trend more cautiously as 'suggestive but not statistically conclusive.'
  3. [§3.1–§3.3 and §4] The conclusion that the π+ originates predominantly from Δ-resonance decay is inferred from low momentum, broad angular, and mid-rapidity distributions. In UrQMD, pion production in this energy range is modeled through resonances, so this interpretation is largely inherited from the transport model rather than independently established. A direct check of the simulation's event record—for example, counting how many of the selected π+ are decay products of Δ resonances—would strengthen the claim. Absent that, the text should more explicitly state that this is a model-internal interpretation, especially since the Discussion acknowledges that a complete disentanglement of mechanisms is not possible within UrQMD.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§2.1] The text says '1.44 × 10^9 events at medium energies (400, 500, and 600 A MeV)' but does not specify whether this is the total number or the number per incident energy. The cross-section normalization in Eq. (8) depends on Ntotal, so this should be clarified.
  2. [§2.2, Eq. (4)] The notation r_pp, r_nn, r_np is introduced, while Eq. (3) uses a single r0. Please define the relation and state explicitly that Eq. (3) is used with the corresponding pair-dependent radii.
  3. [§3] The cross-section errors are quoted from sqrt(N) event counts, whereas §3.1 uses Garwood exact Poisson confidence intervals for the distributions. For consistency, justify the use of the approximate errors for the cross-section numbers or quote the exact intervals.
  4. [General] There are numerous typographical and encoding artifacts in the text and equations (e.g., 'sufficient', 'q⃗', '⚶'). The manuscript should be thoroughly copyedited before resubmission.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: the cross sections are a conditional transport-model prediction, not a fit or a self-referential construction.

full rationale

I traced the derivation chain from UrQMD dynamics (Eqs. 1–2, parameters from Refs. [35,36]) through phase-space coalescence (Eqs. 3–4) to the cross-section formula sigma = A_reaction * N/N_total (Eq. 8). The coalescence parameters p0 = 0.25 GeV/c and r_pp = 2.8, r_nn = r_np = 3.8 fm are chosen within the published range cited in Ref. [46] and are not fitted to reproduce the 12C(12C,12N pi+)12Be cross sections. The paper's own Fig. 2 shows the fragment probability increases with r0, and Sec. 2.2 calls coalescence a 'phenomenological tool intended for order-of-magnitude estimations and trend analysis'; this is an unquantified systematic/robustness limitation, not a definitional equivalence, because the quoted numbers remain well-defined outputs for the stated parameters. The attribution of pi+ to Delta resonance decay is based on kinematic arguments (low momenta, near-isotropy, CM backward peaking) and is explicitly hedged in Sec. 4: 'a complete disentanglement of all mechanisms is not possible within the UrQMD model.' No uniqueness theorem, self-citation, or renamed empirical pattern carries the argument. The prediction is therefore self-contained conditional on model assumptions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central cross-section numbers rest on the UrQMD transport model (parameters from Refs. [35-37]), the hand-set coalescence parameters (Eq. 4), and the assumed freeze-out time. No target data are fitted, so circularity is low, but the model dependence is substantial: the r0 sensitivity shown in Fig. 2 and the hard-EoS choice are not folded into the quoted uncertainties. No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • Coalescence parameters p0, r_pp, r_nn, r_np = p0=0.25 GeV/c, r_pp=2.8 fm, r_nn=r_np=3.8 fm
    Chosen by hand within the published ranges cited in §2.2; Fig. 2 shows the production probability increases significantly with r0, so the absolute cross-section values inherit this choice. No systematic uncertainty from this choice is propagated to Eq. (8).
  • Hard Skyrme-type EoS = not specified numerically (hard Skyrme)
    Adopted in §2.1 as 'suitable for describing the collective dynamics and pion production', but no stiffness value is given and no sensitivity study is shown. The EoS choice can affect pion and fragment yields in this energy range.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption UrQMD with its built-in cross sections, resonance parameters, and mean-field reproduces CE and pion production in 400-600 A MeV heavy-ion collisions.
    Invoked throughout §2.1; the paper cites general UrQMD validation [35-37] but provides no quantitative comparison against experimental data for this specific energy/fragment channel.
  • ad hoc to paper Nucleons satisfying the phase-space proximity conditions Eq. (3) with the chosen parameters form the physical 12N and 12Be fragments.
    This is the coalescence model of §2.2. The paper itself notes the probability depends strongly on r0 (Fig. 2), so the fragment identification is a phenomenological assumption rather than a first-principles constraint.
  • domain assumption 12N has no bound excited states, so its mass is unambiguously the AME2020 ground-state mass.
    Used in §2.2 to fix the 12N energy and to justify a clean final state; supported by NUBASE2020 [49], so this is a well-founded empirical input.
  • domain assumption After 100 fm/c of propagation the system has reached freeze-out and the yields of fragments and pions are saturated.
    Stated in §2.1 with a citation to [44]; no convergence study is shown in this paper, so the saturation time is taken as given.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 19204 in / 13705 out tokens · 136151 ms · 2026-08-01T11:17:13.370186+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Heavy-ion charge-exchange (CE) reactions provide a sensitive probe of isospin dynamics in nuclear collisions. We investigate the reaction $^{12}\mathrm{C}(^{12}\mathrm{C},\,^{12}\mathrm{N}\,\pi^{+})\,^{12}\mathrm{Be}$ at 400--600 A MeV within the ultra-relativistic quantum molecular dynamics model combined with a phase-space coalescence approach. This reaction represents a nontrivial CE channel accompanied by a single $\pi^+$ production in heavy-ion collisions, extending previous studies from lepton-induced to hadronic systems. The $^{12}\mathrm{N}$ fragment is formed via nucleon and meson exchange, whereas $\pi^+$ production is primarily governed by $\Delta$ resonance excitation and decay, enabling simultaneous investigations of CE processes and $\Delta$-induced pion production within the same reaction system. We calculate the reaction cross section and analyze the four-momentum distributions of $^{12}\mathrm{N}$ and $\pi^+$. Characteristic phase-space features reflect different production mechanisms and provide guidance for future experimental designs. Additionally, this reaction may serve as a potential pathway for rare-isotope production.

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 26 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Shvedov, L., Colonna, M., Di Toro, M.: Breakup mechanisms in heavy-ion col- lisions at low energies. Phys. Rev. C81(5), 054605 (2010) https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevC.81.054605

    2010

  2. [2]

    Chinese Physics C34, 1436–1439 (2010)https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/34/ 9/064

    You, Z., Ke-Jun, W., Feng, L.: Charged particle fluctuation in au+au collision. Chinese Physics C34, 1436–1439 (2010)https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/34/ 9/064

    work page doi:10.1088/1674-1137/34/ 2010

  3. [3]

    Leifels, Y., Blaich, T., Elze, T.W., Emling, H., Freiesleben, H., Grimm, K., Henning, W., Holzmann, R., Keller, J.G., Klingler, H., Kratz, J.V., Kulessa, R., Lambrecht, D., Lange, S., Lubkiewicz, E., Moore, E.F., Prokopowicz, W., Schmidt, R., Schütter, C., Spies, H., Stelzer, K., Stroth, J., Wajda, E., Waluś, W., Zinser, M., Zude, E.: Exclusive studies of...

    1993

  4. [4]

    International Journal of Mass Spectrometry 192(1), 49–63 (1999) https://doi.org/10.1016/S1387-3806(99) 00097-4

    Awaya, Y., Kambara, T., Kanai, Y.: Multiple k- and l-shell ionizations of target atoms by collisions with high-energy heavy ions. International Journal of Mass Spectrometry 192(1), 49–63 (1999) https://doi.org/10.1016/S1387-3806(99) 00097-4

    work page doi:10.1016/s1387-3806(99 1999

  5. [5]

    Nuclear Science and Techniques35, 211https://doi.org/10.1007/ s41365-024-01584-1

    Ding, M.-Q., Fang, D.-Q., Ma, Y.-G.: Neutron skin and its effects in heavy- ion collisions. Nuclear Science and Techniques35, 211https://doi.org/10.1007/ s41365-024-01584-1

  6. [6]

    Zhang, Y.H., Zhang, P., Zhou, X.H., Wang, M., Litvinov, Y.A., Xu, H.S., Xu, X., Shuai, P., Lam, Y.H., Chen, R.J., Yan, X.L., Bao, T., Chen, X.C., Chen, H., Fu, C.Y., He, J.J., Kubono, S., Liu, D.W., Mao, R.S., Ma, X.W., Sun, M.Z., Tu, X.L., Xing, Y.M., Zeng, Q., Zhou, X., Zhan, W.L., Litvinov, S., Blaum, K., Audi, G., Uesaka, T., Yamaguchi, Y., Yamaguchi,...

    2018

  7. [7]

    Li, G.-S., Su, J., Sun, B.-H., Terashima, S., Zhao, J.-W., Xu, X.-D., Zhang, J.- C., Guo, G., He, L.-C., Lin, W.-P., Lin, W.-J., Liu, C.-Y., Lu, C.-G., Mei, B., Sun, Z.-Y., Tanihata, I., Wang, M., Wang, F., Wang, S.-T., Wei, X.-L., Wang, J., Xu, J.-Y., Liu, J.-R., Zhang, M.-X., Zheng, Y., Zhu, L.-H., Zhang, X.-H.: New measurement of the elemental fragment...

    2023

  8. [8]

    Su, J., Zhu, L., Xiao, E.: Fluctuations of the largest fragment charge in projectile fragmentation and its nonequilibrium effect. Phys. Rev. C105, 024608 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.105.024608

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.105.024608 2022

  9. [9]

    Zhang, Y., Tian, J., Cheng, W., Guan, F., Huang, Y., Li, H., Lü, L., Wang, R., Wang, Y., Wu, Q., Yi, H., Zhang, Z., Zhao, Y., Duan, L., Hu, R., Huang, M., Jin, G., Jin, S., Lu, C., Ma, J., Ma, P., Wang, J., Yang, H., Yang, Y., Zhang, J., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Y., Ma, C., Qiao, C., Tsang, M.B., Xiao, Z.: Long-time drift of the isospin degree of freedom in heav...

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.95.041602 2017

  10. [10]

    Physics Today48(3), 95–96 (1995)https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2807950

    Csernai, L.P., Trueman, T.L., Bond, P.D.: Introduction to relativistic heavy ion collisions. Physics Today48(3), 95–96 (1995)https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2807950

    work page doi:10.1063/1.2807950 1995

  11. [11]

    Nuclear Physics A757(1), 102–183 (2005)https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2005.03.085

    Adams, J., et al.: Experimental and theoretical challenges in the search for the quark–gluon plasma: The star collaboration’s critical assessment of the evidence from rhic collisions. Nuclear Physics A757(1), 102–183 (2005)https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2005.03.085

    doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2005.03.085 2005

  12. [12]

    Teaneck, NJ (USA); World Scientific Pub

    Wong, C.Y.: Introduction to High-energy Heavy-ion Collisions. Teaneck, NJ (USA); World Scientific Pub. Co., United States (1989)

    1989

  13. [13]

    Nature 614, 244–248 (2023)https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05557-5

    Abdallah, M.S., Aboona, B.E., Adam, J., Adamczyk, L., Adams, J.R., Adkins, J.K., Agakishiev, G., Aggarwal, I., Aggarwal, M.M., Ahammed, Z., Aitbaev, A., Alekseev, I., Anderson, D.M., Aparin, A., Aschenauer, E.C., Ashraf, M.U., Atetalla, F.G., Averichev, G.S., Bairathi, V., Baker, W., Ball Cap, J.G., Bar- ish, K., Behera, A., Bellwied, R., Bhagat, P., Bhas...

    2023

  14. [14]

    Chen, J., Dong, X., He, X., Huang, H., Liu, F., Luo, X., Ma, Y.-G., Ruan, L., Shao, M., Shi, S., Sun, X., Tang, A., Tang, Z., Wang, F., Wang, H., Wang, Y., Xiao, Z., Xie, G., Xu, N., Xu, Q., Xu, Z., Yang, C., Yang, S., Zha, W., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Y., Zhao, J., Zhu, X.: Properties of the qcd matter: review of selected results from the relativistic heavy ion...

    2024

  15. [15]

    Zeitschrift für Physik A Hadrons and Nuclei341, 123–124 (1991)https://doi.org/10.1007/ BF01281285

    Ahner, W., Brockmann, R., Grosse, E., Henning, W., Koczon, P., Sandoval, A., Schicker, R., Senger, P., Baltes, P., Muentz, C., Oeschler, H., Sartorius, S., Wag- ner, A., Bormann, C., Brill, D., Renfordt, R., Shin, Y., Stein, J., Stiebing, K., Stock, R., Stroebele, H., Cieslak, M., Prokopowicz, W., Waluś, W., Kohlmeyer, B., Konrad, W., Poeppl, H., Puehlhof...

    1991

  16. [16]

    Physical review letters72, 3650–3653 (1994)https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.72.3650

    Miskowiec, D., Ahner, W., Barth, R., Cieslak, M., Debowski, M., Grosse, E., Henning, W., Koczon, P., Schicker, R., Schwab, E., Senger, P., Baltes, P., Müntz, C., Oeschler, H., Sartorius, S., Sturm, C., Wagner, A., Beckerle, P., Bormann, C., Brill, D., Shin, Y., Stein, J., Stock, R., Ströbele, H., Kohlmeyer, B., Pöppl, H., Pühlhofer, F., Speer, J., Völkel,...

    1994

  17. [17]

    Yong, G.-C., Rodríguez-Sánchez, J.L., Zhang, Y.: Probing ￿ potential at high and low densities via 3 ￿ H production in C+ C reactions. Phys. Rev. C111, 054617 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.111.054617

    doi:10.1103/physrevc.111.054617 2025

  18. [18]

    Science328, 58–62 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1183980

    Abelev, B.I., Aggarwal, M.M., Ahammed, Z., Alakhverdyants, A.V., Alekseev, I., et al.: Observation of an antimatter hypernucleus. Science328, 58–62 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1183980

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1183980 2010

  19. [19]

    Yao, N., Sorensen, A., Dexheimer, V., Noronha-Hostler, J.: Structure in the speed of sound: From neutron stars to heavy-ion collisions. Phys. Rev. C109, 065803 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.109.065803

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.109.065803 2024

  20. [20]

    La Rivista del Nuovo Cimento46, 1–70 (2023)https://doi.org/10.1007/s40766-023-00039-4 21

    Russotto, P., Cozma, M., De Filippo, E., Le Fevre, A., Leifels, Y., Lukasik, J.: Studies of the equation-of-state of nuclear matter by heavy-ion collisions at inter- mediate energy in the multi-messenger era. La Rivista del Nuovo Cimento46, 1–70 (2023)https://doi.org/10.1007/s40766-023-00039-4 21

    work page doi:10.1007/s40766-023-00039-4 2023

  21. [21]

    Nuclear Physics A 625, 372–434 (1997)https://doi.org/10.1016/S0375-9474(97)00489-2

    Li, G.Q., Lee, C.-H., Brown, G.E.: Kaons in dense matter, kaon production in heavy-ion collisions, and kaon condensation in neutron stars. Nuclear Physics A 625, 372–434 (1997)https://doi.org/10.1016/S0375-9474(97)00489-2

    work page doi:10.1016/s0375-9474(97)00489-2 1997

  22. [22]

    Aboona, B.E., Adam, J., Adams, J.R., Agakishiev, G., Aggarwal, I., Aggarwal, M.M., Ahammed, Z., Aitbaev, A., Alekseev, I., Anderson, D.M., Aparin, A., Atchison, J., Averichev, G.S., Bairathi, V., Baker, W., Ball Cap, J.G., Barish, K., Bhagat, P., Bhasin, A., Bhatta, S., Bordyuzhin, I.G., Brandenburg, J.D., Brandin, A.V., Cai, X.Z., Caines, H., Barca Sánch...

    2023

  23. [23]

    Physics Today45(12), 84–85 (1992)https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2809918

    Feshbach, H., Henley, E.M.: Theoretical nuclear physics: Nuclear reactions. Physics Today45(12), 84–85 (1992)https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2809918

    work page doi:10.1063/1.2809918 1992

  24. [24]

    Physical Review Letters62(13), 1457–1460 (1989)https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.62.1457

    Lenske, H., Wolter, H.H., Bohlen, H.G.: Reaction mechanism of heavy-ion charge- exchange scattering at intermediate energies. Physical Review Letters62(13), 1457–1460 (1989)https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.62.1457

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.62.1457 1989

  25. [25]

    Lenske, H., Cappuzzello, F., Cavallaro, M., Colonna, M.: Heavy ion charge exchangereactionsasprobesfornuclear β-decay.ProgressinParticleandNuclear Physics 109, 103716 (2019)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppnp.2019.103716

    arXiv 2019

  26. [26]

    Physical Review C76(5), 054307 (2007)https://doi

    Grewe, E.-W., Frekers, D., Rakers, S., Adachi, T., Baumer, C., Botha, N.T., Dohmann, H., Fujita, H., Fujita, Y., Hatanaka, K., Nakanishi, K., Negret, A., Neveling, R., Popescu, L., Sakemi, Y., Shimbara, Y., Shimizu, Y., Smit, F.D., Tameshinge, Y., Tamii, A., Thies, J., Brentano, P., Yosoi, M., Zegers, R.G.T., Heyse, J.: (3he,t) reaction on the doubleβ dec...

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.76.054307 2007

  27. [27]

    Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics128, 103999 (2023)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppnp.2022.103999

    Cappuzzello, F., Lenske, H., Cavallaro, M., Agodi, C., Auerbach, N., Bellone, J.I., Bijker, R., Burrello, S., Calabrese, S., Carbone, D., Colonna, M., De Gregorio, G., Ferreira, J.L., Gambacurta, D., García-Tecocoatzi, H., Gargano, A., Lay, J.A., Linares, R., Lubian, J., Santopinto, E., Sgouros, O., Soukeras, V., Spatafora, A.: Shedding light on nuclear a...

    arXiv 2023

  28. [28]

    Progress of Theoretical Physics33(3), 480–488 (1965)https://doi.org/10.1143/PTP.33.480

    Kohmura, T.: Charge exchange nuclear reactions induced by a pion. Progress of Theoretical Physics33(3), 480–488 (1965)https://doi.org/10.1143/PTP.33.480

    work page doi:10.1143/ptp.33.480 1965

  29. [29]

    Mosbacher, C.A., Osterfeld, F.: ∆(1232)-nucleon interaction in the 2H(p, n) charge-exchange reaction. Phys. Rev. C56(4), 2014–2028 (1997)https://doi.org/ 23 10.1103/PhysRevC.56.2014

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.56.2014 2014

  30. [30]

    Osterfeld, F.: Nuclear spin and isospin excitations. Rev. Mod. Phys.64(2), 491– 557 (1992)https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.64.491

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.64.491 1992

  31. [31]

    Bleszynski, E., Bleszynski, M., Glauber, R.J.: Detection of nucleon correlations via pion double-charge-exchange reactions. Phys. Rev. Lett.60(15), 1483–1486 (1988) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.60.1483

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.60.1483 1988

  32. [32]

    The European Physical Journal A 57(5), 159 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1140/epja/ s10050-021-00470-3

    Saito,T.R.,Ekawa,H.,Nakagawa,M.:Novelmethodforproducingvery-neutron- rich hypernuclei via charge-exchange reactions with heavy ion projectiles. The European Physical Journal A 57(5), 159 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1140/epja/ s10050-021-00470-3

    doi:10.1140/epja/ 2021

  33. [33]

    Nature Reviews Physics3(12), 803–813 (2021)https://doi.org/10.1038/s42254-021-00371-w

    Saito, T.R., Dou, W., Drozd, V., Ekawa, H., Escrig, S., He, Y., Kalantar- Nayestanaki, N., Kasagi, A., Kavatsyuk, M., Liu, E., Ma, Y., Minami, S., Muneem, A., Nakagawa, M., Nakazawa, K., Rappold, C., Saito, N., Scheiden- berger, C., Taki, M., Tanaka, Y.K., Yoshida, J., Yoshimoto, M., Wang, H., Zhou, X.: New directions in hypernuclear physics. Nature Revie...

    work page doi:10.1038/s42254-021-00371-w 2021

  34. [34]

    : Measurement of h6 ground state energy in an electron scattering experiment at mami-a1

    Shao, T., Chen, J., Pochodzalla, J., Achenbach, P., Christmann, M., et al. : Measurement of h6 ground state energy in an electron scattering experiment at mami-a1. Phys. Rev. Lett.134(16), 162501 (2025)https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.134.162501

    2025

  35. [35]

    Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics41, 255–369 (1998) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0146-6410(98)00058-1

    Bass, S.A., Belkacem, M., Bleicher, M., Brandstetter, M., Bravina, L., Ernst, C., Gerland, L., Hofmann, M., Hofmann, S., Konopka, J., Mao, G., Neise, L., Soff, S., Spieles, C., Weber, H., Winckelmann, L.A., Stöcker, H., Greiner, W., Hartnack, C., Aichelin, J., Amelin, N.: Microscopic models for ultrarelativistic heavy ion collisions. Progress in Particle ...

    doi:10.1016/s0146-6410(98)00058-1 1998

  36. [36]

    Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics122, 103920 (2022)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppnp.2021.103920

    Bleicher, M., Bratkovskaya, E.: Modelling relativistic heavy-ion collisions with dynamical transport approaches. Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics122, 103920 (2022)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppnp.2021.103920

    arXiv 2022

  37. [37]

    Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics25(9), 1859–1896 (1999)https://doi

    Bleicher, M., Zabrodin, E., Spieles, C., Bass, S.A., Ernst, C., Soff, S., Bravina, L., Belkacem, M., Weber, H., Stöcker, H., Greiner, W.: Relativistic hadron-hadron collisions in the ultra-relativistic quantum molecular dynamics model. Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics25(9), 1859–1896 (1999)https://doi. org/10.1088/0954-3899/25/9/308

    doi:10.1088/0954-3899/25/9/308 1999

  38. [38]

    Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics36(6), 064049 (2009)https: //doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/36/6/064049 24

    Limphirat, A., Kobdaj, C., Bleicher, M., Yan, Y., Stöcker, H.: Strange and non- strange particle production in antiproton–nucleus collisions in the urqmd model. Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics36(6), 064049 (2009)https: //doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/36/6/064049 24

    work page doi:10.1088/0954-3899/36/6/064049 2009

  39. [39]

    Physical Review C94(3), 034608 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.94.034608

    Russotto, P., Gannon, S., Kupny, S., Lasko, P., Acosta, L., Adamczyk, M., Al- Ajlan, A., Al-Garawi, M., Al-Homaidhi, S., Amorini, F., Auditore, L., Aumann, T., Ayyad, Y., Basrak, Z., Benlliure, J., Boisjoli, M., Boretzky, K., Brzychczyk, J., Budzanowski, A., Caesar, C., Cardella, G., Cammarata, P., Chajecki, Z., Chartier, M., Chbihi, A., Colonna, M., Cozm...

    2016

  40. [40]

    Nuclear Physics A1035, 122659 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2023.122659

    Thakur, J., Mukhopadhyay, A., Mali, P.: Forward-backward multiplicity correla- tion and fluctuation in 197au + 197au collisions at fixed target elab = 10a, 20a, 30a and 40a gev in the urqmd model. Nuclear Physics A1035, 122659 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2023.122659

    arXiv 2023

  41. [41]

    Wang, Y., Guo, C., Li, Q., Zhang, H., Li, Z., Trautmann, W.: Collective flow of light particles in au + au collisions at intermediate energies. Phys. Rev. C89, 034606 (2014)https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.89.034606

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.89.034606 2014

  42. [42]

    Li, F., Wang, Y., Gao, Z., Li, P., Lü, H., Li, Q., Tsang, C.Y., Tsang, M.B.: Application of machine learning in the determination of impact parameter in the 132Sn +124Sn system. Phys. Rev. C104, 034608 (2021)https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevC.104.034608

    2021

  43. [43]

    Graef, G., Steinheimer, J., Li, F., Bleicher, M.: Deep sub-threshold Ξ and Λ production in nuclear collisions with the urqmd transport model. Phys. Rev. C 90(6), 064909 (2014)https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.90.064909

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.90.064909 2014

  44. [44]

    Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics31(11), 1359 (2005)https: //doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/31/11/016

    Li, Q., Li, Z., Soff, S., Gupta, R.K., Bleicher, M., Stöcker, H.: Probing the density dependenceofthesymmetrypotentialinintermediate-energyheavyioncollisions. Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics31(11), 1359 (2005)https: //doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/31/11/016

    work page doi:10.1088/0954-3899/31/11/016 2005

  45. [45]

    Sombun, S., Tomuang, K., Limphirat, A., Hillmann, P., Herold, C., Steinheimer, J., Yan, Y., Bleicher, M.: Deuteron production from phase-space coalescence in theurqmdapproach.Phys.Rev.C 99(1),014901(2019) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevC.99.014901 25

    2019

  46. [46]

    Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy 59(7), 672013 (2016)https://doi.org/10.1007/s11433-016-0120-3

    Li, Q., Wang, Y., Wang, X., Shen, C.: Influence of coalescence parameters on the production of protons and helium-3 fragments. Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy 59(7), 672013 (2016)https://doi.org/10.1007/s11433-016-0120-3

    work page doi:10.1007/s11433-016-0120-3 2016

  47. [47]

    Nagle, J.L., Kumar, B.S., Kusnezov, D., Sorge, H., Mattiello, R.: Coalescence of deuterons in relativistic heavy ion collisions. Phys. Rev. C53(1), 367–376 (1996) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.53.367

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.53.367 1996

  48. [48]

    Kruse, H., Jacak, B.V., Molitoris, J.J., Westfall, G.D., Stöcker, H.: Vlasov- uehling-uhlenbeck theory of medium energy heavy ion reactions: Role of mean field dynamics and two body collisions. Phys. Rev. C 31, 1770–1774 (1985) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.31.1770

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.31.1770 1985

  49. [49]

    Chinese Physics C45(3), 030001 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/abddae

    Kondev, F.G., Wang, M., Huang, W.J., Naimi, S., Audi, G.: The nubase2020 evaluation of nuclear physics properties. Chinese Physics C45(3), 030001 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/abddae

    doi:10.1088/1674-1137/abddae 2021

  50. [50]

    tables, graphs and references*

    Wang, M., Huang, W.J., Kondev, F.G., Audi, G., Naimi, S.: The ame 2020 atomic mass evaluation (ii). tables, graphs and references*. Chinese Physics C45(3), 030003 (2021)https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/abddaf

    doi:10.1088/1674-1137/abddaf 2020

  51. [51]

    Navas, S., al., Group, P.D.: Particle data group. Phys. Rev. D110, 030001 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.110.030001

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.110.030001 2024

  52. [52]

    Biometrika28(3/4), 437–442 (1936)https://doi.org/10.2307/2333958

    Garwood, F.: Fiducial limits for the poisson distribution. Biometrika28(3/4), 437–442 (1936)https://doi.org/10.2307/2333958

    work page doi:10.2307/2333958 1936

  53. [53]

    Bondorf,J.P.,Botvina,A.S.,Ilinov,A.S.,Mishustin,I.N.,Sneppen,K.:Statistical multifragmentation of nuclei. Phys. Rept.257, 133–221 (1995)https://doi.org/ 10.1016/0370-1573(94)00097-M

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-1573(94)00097-m 1995

  54. [54]

    Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment1010, 165477 (2021)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima

    Koyama, S., Suzuki, D., Assié, M., Kitamura, N., Lalanne, L., Niikura, M., Otsu, H., Saito, T.Y., Sorlin, O.: A liquid hydrogen target for radioactive beam experiments using the missing mass method. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment1010, 165477 (2021)https://doi.o...

    arXiv 2021

  55. [55]

    Oxford University Press, Oxford (1998)

    Cowan, G.: Statistical Data Analysis. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1998). https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198501565.001.0001 26

    arXiv 1998