Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 271 references

This paper argues that a unified structure-plus-reaction toolkit—antisymmetrized molecular dynamics for structure, the Glauber model for reaction cross sections, and finite-range distorted wave Born approximation (FRDWBA) for Coulomb breaku

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 06:53 UTC pith:XRBKBGFY

load-bearing objection A candid, internally honest review of the authors' own FRDWBA program; the halo and spin-parity claims are model-dependent because of the single-ℓ assumption and C²S=1, and the 'paradigm shift' framing oversells results whose final r-process abundances barely change. the 5 major comments →

arxiv 2607.21730 v1 pith:XRBKBGFY submitted 2026-07-23 nucl-th

Deformation, halo, and bubble structure: A paradigm shift of exotic phenomena in light to medium mass nuclei

R. Barman , R. Chatterjee , W. Horiuchi , M. Kimura , G. Singh , Jagjit Singh , Shubhchintak This is my paper
classification nucl-th MSC 81V35 PACS 21.10.Gv24.10.-i25.60.Gc26.30.-k
keywords island of inversionhalo nucleiBorromean nucleiCoulomb breakupFRDWBAantisymmetrized molecular dynamicsGlauber modelr-process nucleosynthesis
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.

The review integrates microscopic structure calculations with reaction theories to pin down the ground states of weakly bound nuclei in the island of inversion (N=20-28). It claims that Coulomb breakup observables computed with FRDWBA, using a single-ℓ wave function justified by the dominance of the lowest-ℓ component at low separation energy, identify 29Ne, 31Ne, 34Na, and 37Mg as one-neutron halos with dominant p-wave (Jπ=3/2−) configurations. It further predicts 29F, 31F, 39Na, and 40Mg as Borromean two-neutron halos, discusses bubble nuclei with depleted central density, and shows that replacing Hauser-Feshbach rates with FRDWBA-based (n,γ) rates changes local r-process abundances by orders of magnitude. If correct, this would overturn traditional shell-model expectations near the dripline and demonstrate that exotic structure inputs are essential for reliable nucleosynthesis modeling.

Core claim

The central claim is that a weakly bound valence neutron can be described by its dominant low-ℓ component even in a deformed potential, so that the projectile ground-state wave function for 29Ne, 31Ne, 34Na, and 37Mg is well approximated by a spherical Woods-Saxon solution for ℓ=1, with deformation entering through the interaction potential. Using this wave function in the post-form FRDWBA, the authors reproduce measured one-neutron removal cross sections and parallel momentum distributions, concluding that each nucleus has a ground state with Jπ=3/2− and p-wave halo character. For two-neutron systems, hyperspherical three-body calculations with core+n and nn interactions predict Borromean h

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the FRDWBA reduced transition amplitude, factorized under the local momentum approximation into a dynamics integral (evaluated as a Bremsstrahlung integral) and a structure integral containing the projectile ground-state wave function and the fragment-fragment potential Vbc(r1), which carries axially symmetric quadrupole deformation (Eqs. 30-31). Because the structure part is separable, deformation can be varied in the potential without altering the dynamics, and the single-ℓ dominance approximation—lowest ℓ rules the asymptotic wave function when the separation energy tends to zero—lets the authors use a spherical single-ℓ wave function despite deformation. For th

Load-bearing premise

The single-ℓ dominance approximation: for very weakly bound valence neutrons, the lowest-ℓ component is assumed to dominate the asymptotic wave function even in a deformed potential, so the projectile ground state can be computed from a spherical Woods-Saxon well for one ℓ; if deformation-induced ℓ-mixing or core degrees of freedom are substantial, the extracted spin-parities and separation energies shift.

What would settle it

A precise Coulomb breakup measurement of 34Na on a lead target, combined with an independent mass measurement of its one-neutron separation energy: if the data cannot be fitted by the p-wave FRDWBA with any spectroscopic factor C²S ≤ 1 and a separation energy consistent with the mass value (0.17 ± 0.50 MeV), the single-ℓ approximation and the Jπ=2− halo assignment would be falsified. Similarly, if the extracted Sn for 37Mg using shell-model C²S=0.42 does not shift from 0.35 to 0.14 MeV as the paper predicts, the assumed relation between spectroscopic factor and breakup cross section breaks dow

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

If this is right

  • If the assignments hold, 29Ne, 31Ne, 34Na, and 37Mg join the established club of p-wave one-neutron halos, and their ground-state spin-parities (Jπ=3/2−) can be used as fixed inputs for future shell-model and ab initio studies.
  • The predicted Borromean halos 31F, 39Na, and 40Mg have calculable matter radii and reaction cross sections that can be tested at next-generation rare-isotope beam facilities.
  • FRDWBA rates for neutron capture on weakly bound dripline nuclei should replace Hauser-Feshbach rates in r-process network calculations; doing so shifts local abundances by several orders of magnitude even when only a few reactions are changed.
  • The near-universal linear scaling between the relative-energy-spectrum peak and the one-neutron separation energy (slope ~1.01 across deformation values) provides a quick way to extract Sn for weakly bound deformed nuclei.
  • Proton elastic scattering at the first diffraction peak can serve as a spectroscopic probe of diffuseness and thus of particle-hole configurations and bubble structure in these exotic nuclei.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The single-ℓ dominance approximation is the hinge of the paper's conclusions; if deformation-induced ℓ-mixing or neglected core degrees of freedom turn out to be significant in these deformed drip-line nuclei, the extracted spin-parities and separation energies could shift, so the framework's reach may be limited to the most weakly bound systems.
  • The paper's own sensitivity analysis (Sn decreasing from 0.35 to 0.14 MeV when C²S goes from 1 to 0.42 in 37Mg) implies that spectroscopic factors are a larger source of uncertainty than deformation; future work should combine FRDWBA with structure models that supply both the single-particle wave function and the spectroscopic factor consistently.
  • A testable extension is to apply the same toolkit to nuclei just outside the island of inversion, such as neutron-rich carbon and oxygen isotopes, to see whether the predicted p-wave dominance and halo signatures persist or fade as the separation energy increases.
  • The r-process abundance shifts reported here come from replacing only five reaction rates; since direct-capture dominance likely extends to many other weakly bound species, the cumulative effect on final abundances could be larger than the 'few orders of magnitude' shown, a point the paper leaves implicit.

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

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. This review proposes a unified framework for exotic structures in the island of inversion (N=20–28), combining antisymmetrized molecular dynamics (AMD) structure calculations with two reaction theories: the Glauber model for high-energy total reaction cross sections and the finite-range distorted wave Born approximation (FRDWBA) for Coulomb breakup. The paper applies this toolkit to claim one-neutron halo ground states with dominant p-wave (J^π=3/2^-) configurations for 29Ne, 31Ne, 34Na, and 37Mg; two-neutron Borromean halos for 29F, 31F, 39Na, and 40Mg; and to show that replacing Hauser-Feshbach (n,γ) rates with FRDWBA rates changes local r-process abundances by several orders of magnitude. The manuscript is unusually candid about its main approximations: it explicitly states that the single-ℓ dominance approximation is not fully self-consistent and that the C²S=1 spectroscopic assumption is an idealization. However, the impact of these approximations on the central structural and astrophysical claims is not quantified.

Significance. If validated, the paper would deliver a predictive AMD+FRDWBA/Glauber toolkit for dripline physics, with concrete experimental targets at FRIB, RIBF, and FAIR. The review's strengths include its honest treatment of uncertainties: Fig. 10 shows the explicit sensitivity of the extracted 37Mg separation energy to C²S and β2, and the Glauber calculations are parameter-free once densities are fixed. The predictions for 34Na and for two-neutron halos in 31F, 39Na, and 40Mg are falsifiable and timely. The weakness is that the load-bearing single-ℓ dominance approximation is tested only in a narrow sector (negative-parity ℓ=1,3,5 at β2=0.2) and no benchmark against more complete reaction frameworks (XCDCC, particle-rotor, or CDCC with core excitation) is provided. The C²S=1 assumption is shown by the paper's own analysis to shift extracted Sn values by a factor of ~2.5, which propagates into the halo classification and the astrophysical rates.

major comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 2.3, after Eq. (32)] The single-ℓ dominance approximation is the hinge of all FRDWBA conclusions. The text concedes the approach does not treat static deformation self-consistently, and Fig. 8 tests only negative-parity ℓ=1,3,5 at β2=0.2; it does not test s-wave (ℓ=0) mixing or dynamic core excitations. The consequences are visible in the paper's own results: Fig. 9 shows p- and s-wave cross sections overlapping within experimental bands for 29Ne and 31Ne, Table 6 gives a p-wave FWHM of 51 MeV/c vs. the measured 77(18) MeV/c for 31Ne, and Fig. 10 shows C²S-induced shifts. Please benchmark against an XCDCC or particle-rotor calculation for at least one nucleus (e.g., 31Ne) or provide a quantitative estimate of the systematic uncertainty from neglected ℓ-mixing. Without this, the J^π=3/2^- assignments and the extracted Sn values remain model-dependent.
  2. [Sec. 3.3.2, Fig. 10] The uniform C²S=1 assumption is adopted for all configurations despite the text citing shell-model values as low as 0.31 for 37Mg and breakup analyses giving 0.42. Fig. 10 shows that using C²S=0.42 instead of 1.0 changes the extracted 37Mg Sn from 0.35 MeV to 0.14 MeV, a factor ~2.5 shift. Because the extracted Sn values feed directly into the halo classification (low Sn is a prerequisite) and into the astrophysical rates of Sec. 4, this sensitivity must be propagated. The paper should either adopt literature C²S values where available or present C²S sensitivity plots for all four one-neutron halo candidates, not just 37Mg.
  3. [Table 6, Sec. 3.3.5] The calculated p-wave FWHM for 31Ne is 51.24 MeV/c (β2=0), while the measured inclusive width is 77(18) MeV/c on a carbon target. This is a ~40% discrepancy. The text notes the experimental widths are on carbon but does not address the target/mechanism mismatch: the measurements include nuclear breakup contributions, whereas the calculations are pure Coulomb breakup. Since narrow PMDs are a central halo signature, this discrepancy should be discussed quantitatively — e.g., an estimate of nuclear breakup contributions or an explicit statement that the comparison is only qualitative. The same caveat applies to the comparison with well-known halo nuclei such as 11Be.
  4. [Sec. 4.2, Figs. 20-22] The abstract claims the results demonstrate 'their role in the refinement of r-process nucleosynthesis models and elemental abundance predictions.' However, the network calculation modifies only five rates, and the paper itself states that 'the overall final abundance pattern remains largely unchanged.' Fig. 22 shows local changes up to a few orders of magnitude in the logarithmic ratio, but only for nuclei with low abundance. The claim should be qualified: the modified rates alter local isotopic abundances and can redirect flow near the drip line, but the global r-process pattern is stable under these replacements. Please soften the abstract and the concluding statements accordingly.
  5. [General — circularity and self-review] The review is to a large extent a summary of the authors' own program: the decisive methodological references [90,97,98,102,105-107,249] share authorship, and the quantities loop through the data — Woods-Saxon potentials are tuned to literature Sn values, and the cross sections are then compared with experimental data to re-extract Sn. The manuscript should explicitly delineate which inputs are taken from independent measurements and which are model outputs, and should discuss the extent to which the extracted Sn values are independent of the inputs used to generate the wave functions. This is a transparency issue that affects the reader's ability to assess the strength of the structural conclusions.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 8] Panel labels (a)-(d) are placed inside the panels. Consider moving them outside to avoid overlapping with the curves, especially the 29Ne and 31Ne panels where the labels sit near the x-axis.
  2. [Eq. (31)] The sign convention for β2 and the relation to the standard Bohr-Mottelson deformed potential should be stated explicitly. The text says β2 is the quadrupole deformation parameter, but the sign conventions matter for the comparison with, e.g., the Nilsson model.
  3. [Sec. 2.3] The adopted Woods-Saxon parameter values (r0, d, Vws) for each nucleus are scattered across the cited original papers. A summary table would make the review self-contained and help readers reproduce the calculations.
  4. [References] A number of the most load-bearing references (e.g., [90,97,98,102,105-107,249]) are by the authors themselves. Calling this out in a footnote or in the introduction would improve transparency.
  5. [Title and abstract] The phrase 'paradigm shift' in the title is stronger than the content supports; the paper presents a comprehensive toolkit and a set of candidly model-dependent applications. Consider softening the title to reflect the review's actual scope.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the review’s structural and astrophysical claims are checked against external data, and fitting steps are disclosed rather than mislabeled as predictions.

full rationale

The paper’s load-bearing results—FRDWBA Coulomb-breakup cross sections, extraction of one-neutron separation energies, two-neutron halo radii, and r-process abundance changes—are all compared with independent experimental data or are explicitly presented as sensitivity studies. The Woods–Saxon potential is tuned to literature separation energies, and the same separation energies are later re-extracted from cross-section comparisons; this is a disclosed analysis loop, not a claim that the extracted values are first-principles predictions. The paper explicitly states that ‘the extracted Sn values from Coulomb breakup data are intimately linked to the assumed C2S’ and shows how they shift with C2S and β2, so the model dependence is acknowledged rather than hidden. Similarly, the three-body force V3b is ‘adjusted freely to match the desired two-neutron separation energy s2n’, but the resulting matter radii are then compared to measured radii (e.g., for 29F), which is an independent check rather than a circular validation. The single-ℓ dominance approximation is justified by an in-paper numerical solution of the coupled-channel equation (Fig. 8) and by ANC calculations, not solely by the cited prior work; the limitation that static deformation is not treated self-consistently is also stated explicitly. Frequent self-citations occur because this is a review of the authors’ own program, but the decisive physics is either re-derived in the manuscript or benchmarked against external data, so the self-citations are not load-bearing in a way that makes the conclusions circular.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 7 axioms · 0 invented entities

Everything load-bearing in this review is imported: AMD wave functions depend on the Gogny D1S interaction; FRDWBA analysis depends on the single-ℓ dominance premise (from the authors' earlier Ref. [102]), the LMA, C²S = 1, and WS geometries cited to other papers; the three-body halo radii depend on core+n potentials fitted to continuum spectra plus a freely adjusted V3b. No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are introduced. The genuine added value is the synthesis and the falsifiable application to unmeasured systems (34Na, 31F, 39Na, 40Mg).

free parameters (5)
  • Spectroscopic factor C²S = 1.0 assumed (literature values 0.31–0.42)
    All FRDWBA cross sections assume C²S = 1.0 (Sec. 3.3.2); shell-model and eikonal analyses give 0.31–0.42. Extracted Sn depends strongly on this (Fig. 10a–b).
  • One-neutron separation energy Sn = 0.295 ± 0.055 MeV (31Ne, p-wave); 0.35 ± 0.06 MeV (37Mg)
    The Woods-Saxon potential is tuned to reproduce Sn, then Sn is 'extracted' by matching computed σ−1n to experimental bands (Fig. 9) and reused as a structural constraint.
  • Quadrupole deformation β2 = varied 0.0–0.5 in FRDWBA; β = 0.45–0.52 in AMD
    Deformation sensitivity of all Coulomb-breakup observables is explored by hand-scanning β2 (Figs. 11–15); extracted Sn shifts with β2 (Fig. 10c).
  • Woods-Saxon geometry (r0, d, Vws) = values cited to references; 'adjusted according to the nucleus chosen for study'
    The deformed WS potential in Eq. (31) has r0 and d as adjustable geometry inputs besides β2; exact values are not given in the text.
  • Three-body force strength V3b = adjusted freely to match s2n
    Sec. 3.4: the ternary Gaussian potential strength is tuned so the three-body system reproduces the target two-neutron separation energy; with V3b = 0 the systems overbind.
axioms (7)
  • domain assumption Glauber adiabatic and eikonal approximations with parametrized NN profile function (Eqs. 13–18)
    Sec. 2.2 imports standard Glauber multiple-scattering theory with NN parameters from Refs. [64,66,67]; the review notes the OLA/NTG/few-body approximation levels and their validity ranges.
  • domain assumption Lowest-ℓ dominance for weakly bound valence neutrons (Ref. [102])
    Load-bearing: justifies replacing the deformed coupled-channel wave function (Eq. 32) with a single-ℓ spherical WS wave function in all FRDWBA applications (Sec. 2.3).
  • domain assumption Local momentum approximation with K magnitude fixed at R = 10 fm
    The T-matrix factorization (Eq. 30) uses the LMA; constant K at R = 10 fm is justified by peripheral-reaction dominance (Sec. 2.3).
  • ad hoc to paper C²S = 1 for all valence configurations
    Assumed throughout Sec. 3.3; the review concedes 'significant variations in C²S values have been reported in the literature' and shows Sn extraction depends on it.
  • domain assumption Gogny D1S effective interaction for AMD
    The microscopic Hamiltonian (Eq. 1) uses the Gogny D1S parameterization from Ref. [45]; all AMD structure results inherit its physics.
  • domain assumption Inert-core approximation for Borromean three-body systems
    Sec. 3.4: 'an inert-core approximation is commonly adopted... any effects due to internal core rearrangements or core-valence exchange are effectively absorbed into the parameters.'
  • domain assumption Single-multipole (E1) dominance in extracting (n,γ) from Coulomb dissociation
    Eq. (37) maps dσ/dErel to photodisintegration via virtual photon numbers, valid for one multipole; the review argues this is 'not too restrictive' but does not demonstrate it case-by-case.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 54980 in / 20212 out tokens · 181149 ms · 2026-08-01T06:53:00.759798+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

The emergence of exotic nuclear structures, such as deformation, one- and two-neutron halos, and bubble configurations, marks a paradigm shift in our understanding of light- to medium-mass nuclei far from stability, particularly near and within the island of inversion extending across $N=20-28$. In this review, we integrate microscopic structure calculations using the antisymmetrized molecular dynamics method with reaction theories such as the Glauber model for high-energy collisions, and highlight the use of the fully quantum mechanical finite-range distorted wave Born approximation for calculating both inclusive and exclusive Coulomb breakup observables for these medium mass systems. These theoretical frameworks enable precise probing of nuclear density profiles through observables such as total reaction cross sections, neutron removal cross sections, relative energy spectra, parallel momentum distributions, and angular distributions. Applications to several nuclei in the island of inversion reveal enhanced halo extensions, neutron-neutron correlations in Borromean nuclei, and central density depletions in bubbles, challenging traditional shell-model paradigms. Furthermore, the sensitivity of astrophysical reaction rates to these exotic inputs is explored, demonstrating their role in the refinement of r-process nucleosynthesis models and elemental abundance predictions. This unified approach not only bridges nuclear structure and reactions, but also highlights the driplines as frontiers for unraveling nuclear matter under extreme conditions, with implications for rare-isotope beam experiments and beyond.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.21730 by G. Singh, Jagjit Singh, M. Kimura, R. Barman, R. Chatterjee, Shubhchintak, W. Horiuchi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: A selected area of the nuclear Segrè chart for the 7 ≤ Z ≤ 20 isotopes. The orange lines correspond to traditional proton and neutron magic numbers at 2, 8, 20, 28, and 40. Black, blue, red, green, and magenta squares mark the stable, one-neutron/proton halos, two-neutron/proton Borromean halos, Borromean with Borromean core (four-neutron halos), and bubble systems, respectively. The original and modern ve… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: presents an enlarged segment of the nuclear Segrè chart, emphasizing the B-IoI, which constitutes the primary subject of this review. 28F 29F 30F 31F 29Ne 30Ne 31Ne 32Ne 33Ne 34Ne 30Na 31Na 32Na 33Na 34Na 35Na 36Na 37Na 38Na 39Na 31Mg 32Mg 33Mg 34Mg 35Mg 36Mg 37Mg 38Mg 39Mg 40Mg 41Mg 32Al 33Al 34Al 35Al 36Al 37Al 38Al 39Al 40Al 41Al 42Al 43Al N=28 N=20 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: presents a schematic representation of such an elastic breakup process, which is one where the target remains in its g.s. Using the post form FRDWBA theory we formulate a plan to compute the various reaction observables that can highlight the structure of the projectile as well as calculate its neutron capture reaction rates to study its astrophysical applications and relevance. The first step in the proce… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The three-body Jacobi coordinate system for a ‘possibly’ deformed projectile ‘a’ impinging on a target ‘t’. Generically, the triple differential cross-section is defined as, d 3σ dEbdΩbdΩc = 2π hv¯ at ρ(Eb, Ωb, Ωc) 1 ˆj 2 a X µaµbµc |T (+) f i | 2 , (23) where Eb is the energy of fragment b, Ω’s are the solid angles corresponding to fragments b and c, vat is the a-t relative velocity in the initial channel… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: A schematic illustration of particle-hole configurations for N=19 nuclei. Nuclear deformation is a prominent feature in N=20 island of inversion. The intruder configurations result in strong deformation in these systems, generating different particle-hole (mpnh) configurations. As illustrated in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The excitation spectra of 29Ne. The experimental data are taken from Refs. [190–192]. The nuclear surface density provides valuable insights into such complicated structures of nuclei. Surface properties such as radii and diffuseness reflect different particle-hole configurations and can be probed through total reaction and elastic scattering cross sections. These observables offer a useful means to explor… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Angular distribution of proton-elastic scattering cross sections at 800 MeV/nucleon for the nuclei shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The deformed bound-state wave functions of 29Ne, 31Ne, 34Na, and 37Mg calculated by solving Eq. (32). The (black) solid curves represent the wave functions at zero deformation. The (green) dot￾dashed curves correspond to the wave functions at a deformation of β2 = 0.2, including all components associated with ℓ = 1, 3, 5 and their allowed j values. The (red) dashed lines show the wave functions at β2 = 0.2… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The total one-neutron removal cross section (σ−1n) is plotted as a function of neutron separation energy (Sn) for 29Ne, 31Ne, 34Na, and 37Mg undergoing elastic breakup on a Pb target at beam energies of 244, 234, 100, and 244 MeV/nucleon, respectively, obtained using the post-form FRDWBA theory. In all cases, the (black) solid line, (blue) dashed line, and (red) dotted line represent the cross sections for… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: (a–b) One-neutron separation energy (Sn) as a function of spectroscopic factor (C 2S) for the breakup of 37Mg on a Pb target, considering two different ground state configurations of 37Mg. (c) Sn deduced from the comparison of theoretical calculations with experimental data as a function of the quadrupole deformation parameter β2, corresponding to the 36Mg(0 +) ⊗ 2p3/2ν configuration of the 37Mg ground st… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Relative energy spectra of the outgoing fragments corresponding to the breakup reactions shown in panels (a–d) of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Peak positions of relative energy spectra as a function of Sn in the breakup of 31Ne and 34Na on 208Pb at 234 MeV/nucleon and 100 MeV/nucleon, respectively. The valence neutrons in the ground states of both 31Ne and 34Na are supposed to be filled in the 2p3/2 orbital. The left panels show the peaks for deformation parameter, -0.3 ≤ β2 ≤ 0.0, while the right panels display the same for 0.0 ≤ β2 ≤ 0.3. The … view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Full width at half maximum (FWHM) of the parallel momentum distribution of 36Mg, obtained from the Coulomb breakup of 37Mg on a Pb target at a beam energy of 244 MeV/nucleon, shown as a function of the one-neutron separation energy (Sn) and the quadrupole deformation parameter (β2). The projectile ground state is assumed to correspond to the configuration 36Mg(0 +) ⊗ 2p3/2 ν, with a spectroscopic factor C… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Neutron energy-angular distributions for the Coulomb breakup of 31Ne [panels (a) and (b)] and 37Mg [panels (c) and (d)] on Au and Pb targets at beam energies of 234 and 244 MeV/nucleon, respectively. Panels (a) and (c) display the calculated distributions at three different neutron emission angles, θn = 1◦ , 2 ◦ , and 3 ◦ for spherical nuclei, while panels (b) and (d) present the results at a fixed angle … view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Neutron angular distribution for Coulomb breakup of (a) 31Ne on Au target at 234 MeV/nucleon beam energy (b) 37Mg on a Pb target at 244 MeV/nucleon beam energy. 3.3.7 Neutron angular distribution In [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p035_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: The matter radii (Rm) for various isotopes of F (29F and 31F), Na (39Na), and Mg (40Mg). The experimental value shown in the black circle is taken from Ref. [52]. rearrangements or core-valence exchange are effectively absorbed into the parameters of the angular momentum dependent potential. This method has also been applied in previous three-body studies, such as the modeling of the 14Be + n subsystem in… view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: The total reaction cross section (σR) for various isotopes of F (29F and 31F), Na (39Na), and Mg (40Mg) at different incident energies. The experimental value shown in the black circle is taken from Ref. [52]. model configurations. The density for the three-body system was constructed by simply adding the 2n densities calculated within a three-body model to the core density. No center-of-mass correction w… view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: The variation of the capture cross-section and reaction rate due to differences in the structural parameters of a weakly bound nucleus. The study is done for the 33Na(n, γ) 34Na radiative capture reaction using the elastic Coulomb dissociation of 34Na on 208Pb at 100 MeV/nucleon beam energy. Panels a1), b1) and c1) show the capture cross-sections while the parallel panels a2), b2) and c2) exhibit the corr… view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Limited network consisting of Na, Mg and Al isotopes. (α, n) reaction rates from the JINA-REACLIB database [402], indicated by the dotted red lines. Then for two reaction channels, i.e., for the 33Na(n, γ) 34Na and 36Mg(n, γ) 37Mg reactions, rates (including also the inverse photodisintegration rates) were computed using the FRDWBA theory. Subsequently, these FRDWBA rates for these channels are used to re… view at source ↗
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Abundance evolution of network shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p049_20.png] view at source ↗
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: Comparison of the final mass-integrated abundances obtained using only the JINA-REACLIB reaction rates (solid red line) and those obtained by incorporating the FRDWBA rates together with the JINA-REACLIB rates (dashed blue line), shown for two astrophysical scenarios: CCSN and NSM. The black points indicate the solar abundances. 0 50 100 150 200 N 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Z CCSN 0 50 100 150 200 N NSM 4 2 0 … view at source ↗
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: The logarithmic abundance ratios shown for the CCSN and NSM cases. Each square represents a nucleus, and the color scale indicates the logarithmic ratio between the abundances obtained by incorporating the FRDWBA reaction rates for the selected nuclei while retaining all other rates from the JINA-REACLIB database (YFRDWBA), and those obtained using only JINA-REACLIB rates (YREACLIB). The ratios are shown … view at source ↗

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

271 extracted references · 160 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Tanihata, H

    I. Tanihata, H. Toki, T. Kajino, Handbook of nuclear physics, 2023. doi:10.1007/ 978-981-19-6345-2

    2023

  2. [2]

    Nazarewicz, L

    W. Nazarewicz, L. G. Sobotka, The lessons learned from ephemeral nuclei, Physics Today 78 (2) (2025) 30–36. arXiv:https://pubs.aip.org/physicstoday/article-pdf/78/2/30/ 20370962/30\_1\_pt.yvjv.skzx.pdf, doi:10.1063/pt.yvjv.skzx. URL https://doi.org/10.1063/pt.yvjv.skzx

    work page doi:10.1063/pt.yvjv.skzx 2025

  3. [3]

    F. M. Nunes,Why are theorists excited about exotic nuclei?, Physics Today 74 (5) (2021) 34–

    2021

  4. [4]

    Erler, N

    J. Erler, N. Birge, M. Kortelainen, W. Nazarewicz, E. Olsen, A. M. Perhac, M. Stoitsov,The limits of the nuclear landscape, Nature 486 (7404) (2012) 509–512.doi:10.1038/nature11188. URL https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11188 54

    work page doi:10.1038/nature11188 2012

  5. [5]

    G. G. Adamian, N. V. Antonenko, A. Diaz-Torres, S. Heinz,How to extend the chart of nuclides?, The European Physical Journal A 56 (2020) 47.doi:10.1140/epja/s10050-020-00046-7. URL https://doi.org/10.1140/epja/s10050-020-00046-7

    work page doi:10.1140/epja/s10050-020-00046-7 2020

  6. [6]

    D. S. Ahn, N. Fukuda, H. Geissel, N. Inabe, N. Iwasa, T. Kubo, K. Kusaka, D. J. Morrissey, D. Murai, T. Nakamura, M. Ohtake, H. Otsu, H. Sato, B. M. Sherrill, Y. Shimizu, H. Suzuki, H.Takeda, O.B.Tarasov, H.Ueno, Y.Yanagisawa, K.Yoshida,Locationoftheneutrondriplineat FluorineandNeon , Phys.Rev.Lett.123(2019)212501. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.212501. URL ...

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.123.212501 2019

  7. [7]

    D. S. Ahn, J. Amano, H. Baba, N. Fukuda, H. Geissel, N. Inabe, S. Ishikawa, N. Iwasa, T. Ko- matsubara, T. Kubo, K. Kusaka, D. J. Morrissey, T. Nakamura, M. Ohtake, H. Otsu, T. Sakak- ibara, H. Sato, B. M. Sherrill, Y. Shimizu, T. Sumikama, H. Suzuki, H. Takeda, O. B. Tarasov, H. Ueno, Y. Yanagisawa, K. Yoshida,Discovery of 39Na, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129 (202...

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.129.212502 2022

  8. [8]

    A. B. Balantekin, J. Carlson, D. J. Dean, G. M. Fuller, R. J. Furnstahl, M. Hjorth‐Jensen, R. V. F. Janssens, B. Li, W. Nazarewicz, F. M. Nunes, W. E. Ormand, S. Reddy, B. M. Sherrill, Nuclear theory and science of the facility for rare isotope beams, Modern Physics Letters A 29 (2014) 1430010. doi:10.1142/s0217732314300109

    doi:10.1142/s0217732314300109 2014

  9. [9]

    H. L. Crawford, K. Fossez, S. König, A. Spyrou, A vision for the science of rare iso- topes, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science 74 (2024) 141–172. doi:10.1146/ annurev-nucl-121423-091501

    2024

  10. [10]

    B. A. Brown, A. Gade, S. R. Stroberg, J. Escher, K. Fossez, P. Giuliani, C. Hoffman, W. Nazarewicz, C.-Y. Seng, A. Sorensen, N. Vassh, D. Bazin, W. Brown, M. Caprio, H. Craw- ford, P. Danielewicz, C. Drischler, R. García Ruiz, et al., Motivations for early high‐profile frib experiments, Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics 52 (2025) 050501.d...

    work page doi:10.1088/1361-6471/adb449 2025

  11. [11]

    Y. Ye, X. Yang, H. Sakurai, B. Hu,Physics of exotic nuclei, Nature Reviews Physics 7 (1) (2025) 21–37. doi:10.1038/s42254-024-00782-5. URL https://doi.org/10.1038/s42254-024-00782-5

    doi:10.1038/s42254-024-00782-5 2025

  12. [12]

    arXiv:2503.15575

    NuPECC, NuPECC long range plan 2024 for European nuclear physics, arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.15575 (2025). arXiv:2503.15575

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  13. [13]

    URL https://dst.gov.in/sites/default/files/MSV2035-NP-Final.pdf

    Mega science vision 2035: Nuclear physics, final Report (December 2023). URL https://dst.gov.in/sites/default/files/MSV2035-NP-Final.pdf

    2035

  14. [14]

    URL https://www.nishina.riken.jp/researcher/RIBFupgrade/RIBF_Upgrade_NCAC.pdf

    RIBF Facility Upgrade Project, RIKEN Nishina Center for Accelerator-Based Science, Japan. URL https://www.nishina.riken.jp/researcher/RIBFupgrade/RIBF_Upgrade_NCAC.pdf

  15. [15]

    URL https://www.ukri.org/publications/stfc-nuclear-physics-advisory-panel-roadmap/

    Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC), UK Nuclear Physics Advisory Panel,UK nuclear physics roadmap 2024: the physics of nuclei, nuclear matter and nucleosynthesis , document accessed from UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) website (2024). URL https://www.ukri.org/publications/stfc-nuclear-physics-advisory-panel-roadmap/

    2024

  16. [16]

    Andreoiu, S

    C. Andreoiu, S. Barkanova, G. Christian, A. Gezerlis, G. Huber, J. W. Martin, R. Sandapen, The 2027-2034 vision for nuclear physics in Canada, with an outlook to 2041(2026). arXiv: 55 2602.22464. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.22464

    arXiv 2027

  17. [17]

    Dobaczewski, I

    J. Dobaczewski, I. Hamamoto, W. Nazarewicz, J. A. Sheikh,Nuclear shell structure at particle drip lines, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72 (1994) 981–984.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.72.981. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.72.981

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.72.981 1994

  18. [18]

    Sorlin, M

    O. Sorlin, M. G. Porquet, Nuclear magic numbers: new features far from stability, Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 61 (2008) 602–673.doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2008.05.001

    doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2008.05.001 2008

  19. [19]

    Heyde, J

    K. Heyde, J. L. Wood,Shape coexistence in atomic nuclei, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83 (2011) 1467–1521. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.83.1467. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.83.1467

    doi:10.1103/revmodphys.83.1467 2011

  20. [20]

    Nishibata, S

    H. Nishibata, S. Kanaya, T. Shimoda, A. Odahara, S. Morimoto, A. Yagi, H. Kanaoka, M. R. Pearson, C. D. P. Levy, M. Kimura, N. Tsunoda, T. Otsuka,Structure of31Mg: Shape coexistence revealed by β−γ spectroscopy with spin-polarized 31Na, Phys. Rev. C 99 (2019) 024322.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.99.024322. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.99.024322

    doi:10.1103/physrevc.99.024322 2019

  21. [21]

    B. P. Kay, C. R. Hoffman, A. O. Macchiavelli,Effect of weak binding on the apparent spin-orbit splitting in nuclei, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 (2017) 182502.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.182502. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.182502

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.119.182502 2017

  22. [22]

    Chen, Systematic trends in the spin-orbit splitting toward weak-binding, Frontiers in Physics 13 (2025)

    J. Chen, Systematic trends in the spin-orbit splitting toward weak-binding, Frontiers in Physics 13 (2025). doi:10.3389/fphy.2025.1510848

    arXiv 2025

  23. [23]

    Kahlbow, T

    J. Kahlbow, T. Aumann, O. Sorlin, Y. Kondo, T. Nakamura, F. Nowacki, A. Revel, N. L. Achouri, H. Al Falou, L. Atar, H. Baba, K. Boretzky, C. Caesar, D. Calvet, H. Chae, N. Chiga, A. Corsi, F. Delaunay, A. Delbart, Q. Deshayes, Z. Dombrádi, C. A. Douma, Z. Elekes, I. Gašparić, J.-M. Gheller, J. Gibelin, A. Gillibert, M. N. Harakeh, A. Hirayama, M. Holl, A....

    2024

  24. [25]

    A. S. Jensen, K. Riisager, D. V. Fedorov, E. Garrido,Structure and reactions of quantum halos, Rev. Mod. Phys. 76 (2004) 215–261.doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.76.215. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.76.215

    doi:10.1103/revmodphys.76.215 2004

  25. [26]

    Mutschler, A

    A. Mutschler, A. Lemasson, O. Sorlin, D. Bazin, C. Borcea, R. Borcea, Z. Dombrádi, J.-P. Ebran, A. Gade, H. Iwasaki, E. Khan, A. Lepailleur, F. Recchia, T. Roger, F. Rotaru, D. Sohler, 56 M. Stanoiu, S. R. Stroberg, J. A. Tostevin, M. Vandebrouck, D. Weisshaar, K. Wimmer,A proton density bubble in the doubly magic 34Si nucleus, Nature Physics 13 (2) (2017...

    doi:10.1038/nphys3916 2017

  26. [27]

    Duguet, V

    T. Duguet, V. Somà, S. Lecluse, C. Barbieri, P. Navrátil,Ab initio calculation of the potential bubble nucleus 34Si, Phys. Rev. C 95 (2017) 034319.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.95.034319. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.95.034319

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.95.034319 2017

  27. [28]

    U. C. Perera, A. V. Afanasjev,Bubble nuclei: Single-particle versus Coulomb interaction effects, Phys. Rev. C 106 (2022) 024321.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.106.024321. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.106.024321

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.106.024321 2022

  28. [29]

    E. K. Warburton, J. A. Becker, B. A. Brown,Mass systematics for A = 29 − 44 nuclei: The deformed a∼32 region, Phys. Rev. C 41 (1990) 1147–1166.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.41.1147. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.41.1147

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.41.1147 1990

  29. [30]

    Thibault, R

    C. Thibault, R. Klapisch, C. Rigaud, A. M. Poskanzer, R. Prieels, L. Lessard, W. Reisdorf,Direct measurement of the masses of11Li and 26−32Na with an on-line mass spectrometer, Phys. Rev. C 12 (1975) 644–657. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.12.644. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.12.644

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.12.644 1975

  30. [31]

    Huber, F

    G. Huber, F. Touchard, S. Büttgenbach, C. Thibault, R. Klapisch, H. T. Duong, S. Liberman, J. Pinard, J. L. Vialle, P. Juncar, P. Jacquinot,Spins, magnetic moments, and isotope shifts of 21−31Na by high resolution laser spectroscopy of the atomicD1 line, Phys. Rev. C 18 (1978) 2342–2354. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.18.2342. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/P...

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.18.2342 1978

  31. [34]

    Détraz, D

    C. Détraz, D. Guillemaud, G. Huber, R. Klapisch, M. Langevin, F. Naulin, C. Thibault, L. C. Carraz, F. Touchard,Beta decay of27−32Na and their descendants, Phys. Rev. C 19 (1979) 164–

    1979

  32. [35]

    Caurier, F

    E. Caurier, F. Nowacki, A. Poves, J. Retamosa,Shell model study of the neutron rich isotopes from oxygen to silicon, Phys. Rev. C 58 (1998) 2033–2040.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.58.2033. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.58.2033

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.58.2033 1998

  33. [36]

    Caurier, G

    E. Caurier, G. Martínez-Pinedo, F. Nowacki, A. Poves, A. P. Zuker,The shell model as a unified viewofnuclearstructure , Rev.Mod.Phys.77(2005)427–488. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.77.427. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.77.427 57

    doi:10.1103/revmodphys.77.427 2005

  34. [37]

    Otsuka, A

    T. Otsuka, A. Gade, O. Sorlin, T. Suzuki, Y. Utsuno,Evolution of shell structure in exotic nuclei, Rev. Mod. Phys. 92 (2020) 015002.doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.92.015002. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.92.015002

    doi:10.1103/revmodphys.92.015002 2020

  35. [38]

    Caurier, F

    E. Caurier, F. Nowacki, A. Poves,Merging of the islands of inversion atN = 20 and N = 28 , Phys. Rev. C 90 (2014) 014302.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.90.014302. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.90.014302

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.90.014302 2014

  36. [39]

    Doornenbal, H

    P. Doornenbal, H. Scheit, S. Takeuchi, N. Aoi, K. Li, M. Matsushita, D. Steppenbeck, H. Wang, H. Baba, H. Crawford, C. R. Hoffman, R. Hughes, E. Ideguchi, N. Kobayashi, Y. Kondo, J. Lee, S. Michimasa, T. Motobayashi, H. Sakurai, M. Takechi, Y. Togano, R. Winkler, K. Yoneda,In- beam γ-ray spectroscopy of34,36,38Mg: Merging theN=20 and N=28 shell quenching,...

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.111.212502 2013

  37. [40]

    URL https://doi.org/10.1063/PT.3.4748

    arXiv:https://pubs.aip.org/physicstoday/article-pdf/74/5/34/10125461/34\_1\ _online.pdf, doi:10.1063/PT.3.4748. URL https://doi.org/10.1063/PT.3.4748

    work page doi:10.1063/pt.3.4748

  38. [41]

    A. Ono, H. Horiuchi, T. Maruyama, A. Ohnishi,Antisymmetrized version of molecular dynamics with two-nucleon collisions and its application to heavy ion reactions, Progress of Theoretical Physics 87 (5) (1992) 1185–1206.arXiv:https://academic.oup.com/ptp/article-pdf/87/5/ 1185/5272175/87-5-1185.pdf, doi:10.1143/ptp/87.5.1185. URL https://doi.org/10.1143/pt...

    doi:10.1143/ptp/87.5.1185 1992

  39. [42]

    A. Ono, H. Horiuchi, T. Maruyama, A. Ohnishi, Fragment formation studied with antisym- metrized version of molecular dynamics with two-nucleon collisions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68 (1992) 2898–2900. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.68.2898. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.68.2898

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.68.2898 1992

  40. [43]

    Kanada-En’yo, M

    Y. Kanada-En’yo, M. Kimura, H. Horiuchi,Antisymmetrized molecular dynamics: a new insight into the structure of nuclei, Comptes Rendus Physique 4 (4) (2003) 497–520.doi:https://doi. org/10.1016/S1631-0705(03)00062-8. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1631070503000628

    work page doi:10.1016/s1631-0705(03)00062-8 2003

  41. [44]

    Kanada-En’yo, H

    Y. Kanada-En’yo, H. Horiuchi, Structure of light unstable nuclei studied with antisym- metrized molecular dynamics, Progress of Theoretical Physics Supplement 142 (2001) 205–

    2001

  42. [45]

    Berger, M

    J. Berger, M. Girod, D. Gogny,Time-dependent quantum collective dynamics applied to nuclear fission, Computer Physics Communications 63 (1) (1991) 365–374.doi:https://doi.org/10. 1016/0010-4655(91)90263-K. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/001046559190263K

    arXiv 1991

  43. [46]

    D. L. Hill, J. A. Wheeler, Phys. Rev. 89 (1953) 1102–1145. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.89.1102, [link]. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRev.89.1102 58

    doi:10.1103/physrev.89.1102 1953

  44. [47]

    Kanada-En’yo, M

    Y. Kanada-En’yo, M. Kimura, A. Ono,Antisymmetrized molecular dynamics and its applica- tions to cluster phenomena, Progress of Theoretical and Experimental Physics 2012 (1) (2012) 01A202. arXiv:https://academic.oup.com/ptep/article-pdf/2012/1/01A202/11578300/ pts001.pdf, doi:10.1093/ptep/pts001. URL https://doi.org/10.1093/ptep/pts001

    doi:10.1093/ptep/pts001 2012

  45. [48]

    Kanungo,Radii and Momentum Distribution of Unstable Nuclei, Springer Nature Singapore, Singapore, 2023, pp

    R. Kanungo,Radii and Momentum Distribution of Unstable Nuclei, Springer Nature Singapore, Singapore, 2023, pp. 1081–1124.doi:10.1007/978-981-19-6345-2_66. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-6345-2_66

    work page doi:10.1007/978-981-19-6345-2_66 2023

  46. [49]

    Tanihata, H

    I. Tanihata, H. Hamagaki, O. Hashimoto, Y. Shida, N. Yoshikawa, K. Sugimoto, O. Yamakawa, T. Kobayashi, N. Takahashi,Measurements of interaction cross sections and nuclear radii in the light p-shell region, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55 (1985) 2676–2679.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.55.2676. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.55.2676

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.55.2676 1985

  47. [50]

    Kohama, K

    A. Kohama, K. Iida, K. Oyamatsu,Difference between interaction cross sections and reaction cross sections, Phys. Rev. C 78 (2008) 061601.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.78.061601. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.78.061601

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.78.061601 2008

  48. [51]

    Tanihata, H

    I. Tanihata, H. Savajols, R. Kanungo,Recent experimental progress in nuclear halo structure studies, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 68 (2013) 215–313. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppnp. 2012.07.001. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146641012001081

    doi:10.1016/j.ppnp 2013

  49. [52]

    Bagchi, R

    S. Bagchi, R. Kanungo, Y. K. Tanaka, H. Geissel, P. Doornenbal, W. Horiuchi, G. Hagen, T. Suzuki, N. Tsunoda, D. S. Ahn, H. Baba, K. Behr, F. Browne, S. Chen, M. L. Cortés, A. Estradé, N. Fukuda, M. Holl, K. Itahashi, N. Iwasa, G. R. Jansen, W. G. Jiang, S. Kaur, A. O. Macchiavelli, S. Y. Matsumoto, S. Momiyama, I. Murray, T. Nakamura, S. J. Novario, H. J...

    2020

  50. [54]

    Masui, W

    H. Masui, W. Horiuchi, M. Kimura,Two-neutron halo structure of31Fand a novel pairing antihalo effect, Phys. Rev. C 101 (2020) 041303.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.101.041303. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.101.041303

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.101.041303 2020

  51. [55]

    Singh, J

    J. Singh, J. Casal, W. Horiuchi, N. R. Walet, W. Satuła,Prediction of two-neutron halos in the n=28 isotones40Mg and 39Na, Phys. Lett. B 853 (2024) 138694.doi:https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.physletb.2024.138694. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269324002521

    arXiv 2024

  52. [56]

    Tanihata, Nuclear Physics with RIB’s: How it all started, European Physical Journal Plus 131 (4) (2016) 90.doi:10.1140/epjp/i2016-16090-x

    I. Tanihata, Nuclear Physics with RIB’s: How it all started, European Physical Journal Plus 131 (4) (2016) 90.doi:10.1140/epjp/i2016-16090-x

    work page doi:10.1140/epjp/i2016-16090-x 2016

  53. [57]

    Ozawa, T

    A. Ozawa, T. Suzuki, I. Tanihata,Nuclear size and related topics, Nucl. Phys. A 693 (1) (2001) 32–62, radioactive Nuclear Beams.doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0375-9474(01)01152-6. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0375947401011526 59

    doi:10.1016/s0375-9474(01)01152-6 2001

  54. [58]

    Abu-Ibrahim, Y

    B. Abu-Ibrahim, Y. Suzuki,Utility of nucleon-target profile function in cross section calculations, Phys. Rev. C 61 (2000) 051601.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.61.051601. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.61.051601

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.61.051601 2000

  55. [59]

    R. J. Glauber, Lectures in Theoretical Physics, edited by W. E. Brittin and L. G. Dunham, Interscience, New York, Vol. 1, p.315, 1959

    1959

  56. [60]

    Horiuchi, Y

    W. Horiuchi, Y. Suzuki, B. Abu-Ibrahim, A. Kohama,Erratum: Systematic analysis of reaction cross sections of carbon isotopes, Phys. Rev. C 76 (2007) 039903.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.76. 039903. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.76.039903

    doi:10.1103/physrevc.76 2007

  57. [62]

    Horiuchi, Y

    W. Horiuchi, Y. Suzuki, B. Abu-Ibrahim, A. Kohama,Systematic analysis of reaction cross sec- tions of carbon isotopes, Phys. Rev. C 75 (2007) 044607.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.75.044607. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.75.044607

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.75.044607 2007

  58. [63]

    J. A. Tostevin, J. S. Al-Khalili, Calculations of reaction cross sections for 19C at relativistic energies, Phys. Rev. C 59 (1999) R5–R8.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.59.R5. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.59.R5

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.59.r5 1999

  59. [64]

    Abu-Ibrahim, W

    B. Abu-Ibrahim, W. Horiuchi, A. Kohama, Y. Suzuki,Reaction cross sections of carbon isotopes incident on a proton, Phys. Rev. C 77 (2008) 034607.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.77.034607. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.77.034607

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.77.034607 2008

  60. [65]

    J. S. Al-Khalili, J. A. Tostevin,Matter radii of light halo nuclei, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76 (1996) 3903–

    1996

  61. [66]

    Abu-Ibrahim, W

    B. Abu-Ibrahim, W. Horiuchi, A. Kohama, Y. Suzuki,Erratum: Reaction cross sections of carbon isotopes incident on a proton, Phys. Rev. C 80 (2009) 029903. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.80. 029903. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.80.029903

    doi:10.1103/physrevc.80 2009

  62. [68]

    Horiuchi, Y

    W. Horiuchi, Y. Suzuki, P. Capel, D. Baye,Probing the weakly-bound neutron orbit of 31Ne with total reaction and one-neutron removal cross sections, Phys. Rev. C 81 (2010) 024606. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.81.024606. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.81.024606

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.81.024606 2010

  63. [69]

    Abu-Ibrahim, S

    B. Abu-Ibrahim, S. Iwasaki, W. Horiuchi, A. Kohama, Y. Suzuki, Elastic and total reaction cross sections of oxygen isotopes in glauber theory, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 78 (4) (2009) 044201–044201. doi:10.1143/jpsj.78.044201

    work page doi:10.1143/jpsj.78.044201 2009

  64. [71]

    Nagahisa, W

    T. Nagahisa, W. Horiuchi,Examination of the 22C radius determination with interaction cross sections, Phys. Rev. C 97 (2018) 054614.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.97.054614. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.97.054614

    doi:10.1103/physrevc.97.054614 2018

  65. [72]

    S. M. Lenzi, A. Vitturi, F. Zardi, Systematic analysis of heavy-ion reaction data in terms of an eikonal approach: Elastic and inelastic scattering, Phys. Rev. C 40 (1989) 2114–2123.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.40.2114. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.40.2114

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.40.2114 1989

  66. [73]

    Horiuchi, Y

    W. Horiuchi, Y. Suzuki,22C: An s-wave two-neutron halo nucleus, Phys. Rev. C 74 (2006) 034311. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.74.034311. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.74.034311 60

    doi:10.1103/physrevc.74.034311 2006

  67. [74]

    Ray, Proton-nucleus total cross sections in the intermediate energy range, Phys

    L. Ray, Proton-nucleus total cross sections in the intermediate energy range, Phys. Rev. C 20 (1979) 1857–1872. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.20.1857. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.20.1857

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.20.1857 1979

  68. [76]

    Varga, S

    K. Varga, S. C. Pieper, Y. Suzuki, R. B. Wiringa,Monte carlo integration in glauber model analysis of reactions of halo nuclei, Phys. Rev. C 66 (2002) 034611.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.66. 034611. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.66.034611

    doi:10.1103/physrevc.66 2002

  69. [77]

    S. M. Lenzi, F. Zardi, A. Vitturi, Multichannel approach to the glauber model for heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C 42 (1990) 2079–2092.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.42.2079. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.42.2079

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.42.2079 1990

  70. [78]

    Horiuchi, Y

    W. Horiuchi, Y. Suzuki, R. B. Wiringa,Glauber-theory calculations of high-energy nuclear scat- tering observables using variational monte carlo wave functions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 136 (2026) 202501. doi:10.1103/ppqx-yn59. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ppqx-yn59

    work page doi:10.1103/ppqx-yn59 2026

  71. [79]

    Horiuchi, Y

    W. Horiuchi, Y. Suzuki, R. B. Wiringa,Glauber-theory analysis of nuclear reactions on a12C target with variational monte carlo wave functions, Phys. Rev. C 113 (2026) 064601.doi:10. 1103/gcbk-s7tc. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/gcbk-s7tc

    work page doi:10.1103/gcbk-s7tc 2026

  72. [80]

    Suzuki, K

    Y. Suzuki, K. Yabana, R. G. Lovas, K. Varga, Structure and reactions of light exotic nuclei, Taylor & Francis, London, 2003.doi:10.4324/9780203168271

    work page doi:10.4324/9780203168271 2003

  73. [81]

    Hatakeyama, W

    S. Hatakeyama, W. Horiuchi, Complete glauber calculations for proton–nucleus inelastic cross sections, Nuclear Physics A 985 (2019) 20–37.doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2019.02.004

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2019.02.004 2019

  74. [82]

    Horiuchi, S

    W. Horiuchi, S. Hatakeyama, S. Ebata, Y. Suzuki, Low-lying electric-dipole strengths of ca, ni, and sn isotopes imprinted on total reaction cross sections, Phys. Rev. C 96 (2017) 024605. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.96.024605. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.96.024605

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.96.024605 2017

  75. [83]

    Horiuchi, T

    W. Horiuchi, T. Inakura, T. Nakatsukasa, Y. Suzuki, Systematic analysis of total reaction cross sections of unstable nuclei with glauber theory, Proceedings of the Conference on Advances in Radioactive Isotope Science (ARIS2014) (2015).doi:10.7566/jpscp.6.030079

    work page doi:10.7566/jpscp.6.030079 2015

  76. [84]

    Kanungo, A

    R. Kanungo, A. Prochazka, W. Horiuchi, C. Nociforo, T. Aumann, D. Boutin, D. Cortina-Gil, B. Davids, M. Diakaki, F. Farinon, H. Geissel, R. Gernhäuser, J. Gerl, R. Janik, B. Jonson, B. Kindler, R. Knöbel, R. Krücken, M. Lantz, H. Lenske, Y. Litvinov, B. Lommel, K. Mahata, P. Maierbeck, A. Musumarra, T. Nilsson, C. Perro, C. Scheidenberger, B. Sitar, P. St...

    2011

  77. [85]

    Horiuchi, Y

    W. Horiuchi, Y. Suzuki, T. Inakura, Probing neutron-skin thickness with total reaction cross sections, Phys. Rev. C 89 (2014) 011601.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.89.011601. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.89.011601 61

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.89.011601 2014

  78. [86]

    Estradé, R

    A. Estradé, R. Kanungo, W. Horiuchi, F. Ameil, J. Atkinson, Y. Ayyad, D. Cortina-Gil, I. Dill- mann, A. Evdokimov, F. Farinon, H. Geissel, G. Guastalla, R. Janik, M. Kimura, R. Knöbel, J. Kurcewicz, Y. A. Litvinov, M. Marta, M. Mostazo, I. Mukha, C. Nociforo, H. J. Ong, S. Pietri, A. Prochazka, C. Scheidenberger, B. Sitar, P. Strmen, Y. Suzuki, M. Takechi...

    2014

  79. [87]

    Kanungo, W

    R. Kanungo, W. Horiuchi, G. Hagen, G. R. Jansen, P. Navratil, F. Ameil, J. Atkinson, Y. Ayyad, D. Cortina-Gil, I. Dillmann, A. Estradé, A. Evdokimov, F. Farinon, H. Geissel, G. Guastalla, R. Janik, M. Kimura, R. Knöbel, J. Kurcewicz, Y. A. Litvinov, M. Marta, M. Mostazo, I. Mukha, C. Nociforo, H. J. Ong, S. Pietri, A. Prochazka, C. Scheidenberger, B. Sita...

    2016

  80. [88]

    Bagchi, R

    S. Bagchi, R. Kanungo, W. Horiuchi, G. Hagen, T. Morris, S. R. Stroberg, T. Suzuki, F. Ameil, J. Atkinson, Y. Ayyad, D. Cortina‐Gil, I. Dillmann, A. Estradé, A. Evdokimov, F. Farinon, H. Geissel, G. Guastalla, R. Janik, S. Kaur, R. Knöbel, J. Kurcewicz, Y. A. Litvinov, M. Marta, M. Mostazo, I. Mukha, C. Nociforo, H. J. Ong, S. Piétri, A. Prochazka, C. Sch...

    2019

Showing first 80 references.