Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 300 references

A community white paper from a two-week FRIB program argues that beta decay at FRIB can simultaneously advance nuclear structure, r-process nucleosynthesis, and precision tests of the Standard Model, with the main bottleneck shifting from e

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 03:57 UTC pith:2R42IT5F

load-bearing objection A solid community white paper, no new results, but an honest and comprehensive roadmap that deserves referee time. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.22983 v1 pith:2R42IT5F submitted 2026-07-25 nucl-th nucl-ex

Future directions in nuclear β decay at FRIB and beyond

Garrett B. King , Ayala Glick-Magid , Grigor Sargsyan , Mark A. Caprio , Kyle G. Leach , John A. Behr , Francesca Bonaiti , Maxime Brodeur
show 33 more authors
Graham Chambers-Wall Heather L. Crawford Maria Dawid Wouter Dekens Michael Gennari Robert Grzywacz Peter Gysbers Heather S. Harrington Heiko Hergert Lotta Jokiniemi Brenden Longfellow Rebeka S. Lubna Kelsey A. Lund Giacomo Marocco Anna E. McCoy Dan Melconian Alexis Mercenne David C. Moore Oscar Naviliat-Cuncic Samuel J. Novario Timilehin H. Ogunbeku Walter C. Pettus Ryan Plestid Bertis C. Rasco Ante Ravl\'{i}c Yukiya Saito Dustin P. Scriven Chien-Yeah Seng Nadezda A. Smirnova Artemis Spyrou Vandana Tripathi Xing Wu Zhengyu Xu
This is my paper
classification nucl-th nucl-ex PACS 23.40.-s23.40.Hc12.15.Hh
keywords beta decayFRIBnuclear structureCKM unitarityr-process nucleosynthesisV_ud extractionmany-body methodsbeyond Standard Model
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.

This white paper, produced after a two-week topical program at FRIB, aims to establish that nuclear beta decay is now a discovery tool spanning three fronts: nuclear structure at the limits of stability, the astrophysical r-process, and precision tests of the Standard Model. It argues that the payoff depends on pairing new experimental capabilities—above all the FRIB Decay Station initiator with its two-focal-plane design for discrete and total absorption spectroscopy—with many-body theory that can supply controlled radiative, recoil, and isospin-breaking corrections. A sympathetic reader should take away that the field's next advances will come less from collecting more events than from nailing down theoretical corrections and uncertainty budgets.

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that FRIB will transform beta-decay studies across nuclear structure, astrophysics, and fundamental symmetries, and that theory-experiment coordination is the limiting factor. It catalogs the experimental toolbox—half-lives, branching ratios, beta-delayed neutron emission, discrete gamma spectroscopy, total absorption spectroscopy, beta-energy and recoil spectroscopy—and maps each to the many-body methods (DFT, QRPA, shell model, and ab initio approaches) needed for interpretation. On the precision side, it identifies the corrected Ft value as the key quantity, with the V_ud extraction now limited by isospin-symmetry-breaking and radiative corrections rather than

What carries the argument

The corrected Ft value—Ft = f t (1+delta'_R)(1+delta_NS - delta_C)(1 + (f_A/f_V) rho^2)—is the central identity that carries the precision-physics argument, connecting measured half-lives, branching ratios, and Q-values to V_ud through a chain of radiative and nuclear-structure corrections. On the experimental side, the FRIB Decay Station initiator (FDSi) is the named apparatus: a reconfigurable two-focal-plane system with gamma and neutron arrays at one focus and a total absorption spectrometer at the other, designed to deliver decay data far from stability. The argument's pivot is that the corrections, not the counting statistics, now set the achievable precision.

Load-bearing premise

The roadmap stands or falls on two planning assumptions: that the workshop's participants represent the field's priorities, and that FRIB will actually produce the assumed beams—reaching the neutron and proton drip lines up to N/Z=82 at about one nucleus per week—with FDSi performing as designed.

What would settle it

Measure the fully corrected Ft value for 26mAl and compare it with the 15-transition average: a discrepancy beyond the quoted uncertainties would show the correction scheme (delta_NS, delta_C, delta'_R) is incomplete; alternatively, if FRIB's measured production rates for key neutron-rich species near N=126 come in an order of magnitude below the assumed 1-per-week level, the paper's experimental priorities lose their foundation.

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

If this is right

  • If FRIB delivers the assumed beam rates, decay spectroscopy near the N/Z=82 shell closures should uncover many new isomers and beta-delayed multi-neutron emitters, giving direct tests of continuum coupling and deformation.
  • Measured half-lives and strength functions for neutron-rich nuclei will constrain or refute global QRPA/DFT decay models; the newer tabulations' prediction of slower rates beyond N=126 would change predicted kilonova heating and the r-process abundance pattern.
  • A single-transition V_ud extraction from 26mAl becomes possible at the same precision as the 15-transition average, providing a sharper CVC test once delta_NS and delta_C are controlled.
  • Ab initio recoil-order calculations imply a Standard-Model Fierz term of about -1.5e-3 in 6He; experiments searching for tensor currents must subtract this baseline to interpret a null result as a BSM limit.
  • Quantum-sensing techniques (CRES, STJ arrays, levitated nanoparticles) extend precision beta spectroscopy to short-lived species, with SALER at FRIB removing the long-half-life constraint on embedded-source measurements.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the paper's diagnosis is right, the highest-leverage investments are in uncertainty quantification for nuclear interactions and in emulators, not simply more beam time; the returns would be visible as shrinking error bars on delta_NS and delta_C.
  • The 26mAl single-transition idea generalizes: a small set of 'golden' superallowed emitters, each with independent ab initio corrections, would give a stronger CVC test than one average, because correlated systematic errors would be exposed.
  • A testable extension the paper leaves implicit: measuring the real-photon spectrum in 0+->0+ decays, where the nucleus-dependent piece scales as E_gamma (Q-E_gamma)^3, could directly probe delta_NS at low momentum transfer.
  • The paper's discussion of induced second-class currents suggests that low-energy beta-decay experiments could constrain CVC-breaking vector-current terms with the same E_beta dependence as the Fierz term; a dedicated global fit of beta-spectrum shapes over a range of Z would separate these contributions.

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. This white paper, produced by the FRIB Theory Alliance topical program 'Future Directions in Nuclear β Decays at FRIB,' surveys the experimental methods, nuclear many-body approaches, and science opportunities relevant to β-decay studies at FRIB and other facilities. It covers half-life, branching-ratio, β-delayed neutron, total absorption, and β-spectrum measurements; density functional theory, QRPA, shell-model, and ab initio methods; and applications to nuclear structure, astrophysics, the extraction of V_ud, searches for scalar/tensor currents, and neutrino physics. The paper explicitly positions itself as a snapshot of the field and a roadmap rather than as a source of new derivations.

Significance. If taken as a roadmap, the paper is a valuable community resource: it is comprehensive, current, and includes many specific numerical results and explicit caveats about unresolved corrections (e.g., δ_NS uncertainty, recoil-order corrections, Fierz-term assumptions). Its main strengths are its breadth, the authority of the author list, and its identification of concrete experimental–theory synergies. The paper makes no new falsifiable scientific claim, but its planning recommendations could significantly influence the FRIB β-decay program, so the accuracy of its implicit assumptions is important.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section IV.B] The roadmap's exotic-beam priorities rest on a single forward-looking rate projection: 'FRIB is expected to reach the neutron and proton drip lines up to at least the N/Z=82 shell closures at the 1/week level [218].' This is a projected yield, not a measured one, and no sensitivity analysis is provided to show how the recommended priorities (e.g., β-strength measurements near N=82 in Sec. IV.C, r-process waiting-point decays in Sec. V.A) would change if actual production rates are an order of magnitude lower. Please add an explicit caveat and a brief discussion of the consequences for the roadmap if the projection is not met.
  2. [Section I (Preface)] The paper states, 'The document reflects the perspectives of the participants of the program.' This is an honest scope limitation, but it is load-bearing for a roadmap intended for the broader community. The manuscript should either describe the participant composition (subfields, institutions, geography) or explicitly acknowledge in the Preface that the prioritization of topics may not be fully representative. Without this, the roadmap could be mistaken for a community-wide consensus when it is only a program-level one.
  3. [Section VI.D.4] The paper reports two independent ab initio determinations of δ_NS for the 10C superallowed transition—NCSM giving δ_NS = −4.22(31)×10^−3 and QMC giving δ_NS = −[4.46(48)−4.64(77)]×10^−3 plus an energy-dependent term. The text correctly notes that 'nuclear interaction uncertainties are at present hard to quantify' and that correlations between calculations are not well quantified. This is a central input to V_ud, so the paper should offer a more concrete recommendation than leaving the discrepancy open-ended—for example, endorsing a common-interaction benchmark across NCSM, QMC, and coupled-cluster methods, and giving a plausible timeline for such a comparison.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section III.E] Typo: 'physis' should be 'physics.'
  2. [Section III.D.2] Typo: 'eignenbasis' should be 'eigenbasis.'
  3. [Section IX (Summary)] Typos: 'FSDi' should be 'FDSi' (the acronym used elsewhere), and 'limites' should be 'limits.'
  4. [Section VII.A.2] The sentence about the inconsistency of the ~a prescription in Refs. [379–381] with the assumption of a zero Fierz term is important and could easily be missed in a long subsection. It would benefit from being highlighted as a key caveat for future analyses.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: the paper is a community white paper/roadmap with no derived predictions, so there are no input-output reductions to expose.

full rationale

The paper explicitly defines itself as a discussion summary: 'This white paper summarizes the main points of discussion over the two-week program, and it aims to provide a snapshot of the current status of the field while also highlighting important questions and opportunities for future work.' It makes no prediction derived from fitted parameters and contains no derivation chain whose conclusion is equivalent to an input. The only load-bearing quantitative statements are forward-looking facility and instrument assumptions, e.g., 'it is expected to reach the neutron and proton drip lines up to at least the N/Z=82 shell closures at the 1/week level [218]' and the FDSi two-focal-plane configuration; these are planning assumptions, not results derived by the paper. Several numerical inputs (e.g., δ_NS for 10C from [82], recoil-order corrections for 6He from [393], and VS-IMSRG strength-function results from [83]) are cited from the authors' own prior work, but they are reported as external published results with stated caveats ('nuclear interaction uncertainties are at present hard to quantify'), not manipulated into new conclusions. A review citing its authors' earlier calculations is not circular unless the argument reduces to an unverified self-citation; here no central claim is established solely by a self-citation, and recommendations are framed as opportunities rather than forced conclusions. Thus no circular step can be exhibited.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

This white paper introduces no new parameters or hypothetical entities. The entries above are fitted quantities the review inherits from the literature; they are listed because the forward-looking recommendations depend on them. The axioms capture the frameworks and facility assumptions the recommendations presuppose.

free parameters (4)
  • Nuclear energy density functional (EDF) parameters = ~10-15 parameters fitted to nuclear masses and radii (Skyrme/Gogny functionals)
    Section III.A states nuclear EDFs are phenomenological with parameters fitted to data; QRPA/DFT beta-decay half-life predictions reviewed here inherit these fits.
  • Chiral low-energy constants (LECs) in weak two-body currents = partially undetermined / fitted to few-body data or lattice input
    Sections VI.D.4-5 and VIII.C report dNS and 0nubetabeta matrix elements whose dominant uncertainties are LECs; the review treats them as inputs to be constrained.
  • Axial quenching factor gA_eff/gA = approx 0.7-0.8 in phenomenological shell-model treatments
    Section IV.C describes the empirical quenching needed in one-body shell-model Gamow-Teller calculations; ab initio two-body currents are claimed to resolve this, but the paper does not derive either.
  • Isospin-symmetry-breaking correction dC = transition-dependent values, e.g., ~0.1-0.5% (Fig. 8)
    Section VI.C reviews dC values computed by fitted shell-model/WS methods; these are inputs to Vud and themselves depend on fitted Woods-Saxon parameters.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption The Standard Model with CKM unitarity is the correct null hypothesis for interpreting beta-decay observables.
    Section VI frames deviations in Vud, Fierz, and correlations as new physics, assuming SM baseline; not proved here.
  • domain assumption Chiral effective field theory supplies systematically improvable nuclear interactions and electroweak currents, with low-energy constants that can be constrained.
    Sections III, IV, VI-VIII use chiral EFT to assign corrections and uncertainties (dNS, recoil terms, 0nubetabeta operators).
  • domain assumption Existing many-body methods (DFT, QRPA, shell model, NCSM, CC, IMSRG, QMC) provide valid nuclear wave functions for the transitions discussed.
    Section III's survey and the recommendations in later sections presuppose the methods are adequate and extrapolable to FRIB-relevant nuclei.
  • domain assumption FRIB will deliver the beams, intensities, and detector systems assumed in the forward-looking sections.
    Section II describes FDSi and Section IV.B assumes dripline reach 'at the 1/week level' (with citation), so the roadmap depends on facility performance.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 46797 in / 16099 out tokens · 158839 ms · 2026-08-01T03:57:13.639855+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Motivated by the opportunities presented for studies relevant to nuclear structure, astrophysics, and fundamental symmetries with nuclear $\beta$ decay, the Facility for Rare Isotope Beams (FRIB) Theory Alliance topical program ``Future Directions in Nuclear $\beta$ Decays at FRIB'' was held in September of 2025. This white paper summarizes the main points of discussion over the two-week program, and it aims to provide a snapshot of the current status of the field while also highlighting important questions and opportunities for future work. We provide an overview of the experimental tools and techniques that enable modern $\beta$ decay studies, discuss the current state of nuclear many-body approaches used to study $\beta$ decays, and highlight the important science questions that can be addressed by weak decays.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.22983 by Alexis Mercenne, Anna E. McCoy, Ante Ravl\'{i}c, Artemis Spyrou, Ayala Glick-Magid, Bertis C. Rasco, Brenden Longfellow, Chien-Yeah Seng, Dan Melconian, David C. Moore, Dustin P. Scriven, Francesca Bonaiti, Garrett B. King, Giacomo Marocco, Graham Chambers-Wall, Grigor Sargsyan, Heather L. Crawford, Heather S. Harrington, Heiko Hergert, John A. Behr, Kelsey A. Lund, Kyle G. Leach, Lotta Jokiniemi, Maria Dawid, Mark A. Caprio, Maxime Brodeur, Michael Gennari, Nadezda A. Smirnova, Oscar Naviliat-Cuncic, Peter Gysbers, Rebeka S. Lubna, Robert Grzywacz, Ryan Plestid, Samuel J. Novario, Timilehin H. Ogunbeku, Vandana Tripathi, Walter C. Pettus, Wouter Dekens, Xing Wu, Yukiya Saito, Zhengyu Xu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: FRIB Decay Station Initiator is designed to perform comprehensive [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: The truncation scheme for the many-body oscillator basis expansion with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Decoupling of particle-hole excitations from a 0p0h reference state: the schematic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: The Segr`e chart with colors indicating the prominent decay mode. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p035_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Diagrammatic scheme of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: Energy surface of the shape coexisting nucleus [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p038_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8: Shell-model plus WS calculations of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p051_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9: Evaluations of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p060_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10: Schematic representation of the approach taken in this work to connect the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p063_10.png] 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

300 extracted references · 29 linked inside Pith

  1. [7]

    Simon, S

    A. Simon, S. Quinn, A. Spyrou,et al., SuN: Summing NaI(Tl) gamma-ray detector for cap- ture reaction measurements, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment703, 16 (2013)

    2013

  2. [8]

    Harris, M

    C. Harris, M. Smith, A. Spyrou,et al., SuNTAN: A new tape-transport system forβ-decay experiments, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment , 171185 (2025)

    2025

  3. [9]

    Helmer, J

    R. Helmer, J. Hardy, V. Iacob,et al., The use of Monte Carlo calculations in the deter- mination of a Ge detector efficiency curve, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment511, 360 (2003)

    2003

  4. [10]

    Blank, J

    B. Blank, J. Souin, P. Ascher,et al., High-precision efficiency calibration of a high-purity co-axial germanium detector, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment776, 34 (2015)

    2015

  5. [11]

    Savard, A

    G. Savard, A. Galindo-Uribarri, E. Hagberg,et al., 10C Superallowed Branching Ratio and the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa Matrix Unitarity, Phys. Rev. Lett.74, 1521 (1995)

    1995

  6. [12]

    Dimitriou, I

    P. Dimitriou, I. Dillmann, B. Singh,et al., Development of a Reference Database for Beta- Delayed Neutron Emission, Nuclear Data Sheets173, 144 (2021), special Issue on Nuclear Reaction Data

    2021

  7. [13]

    M. R. Mumpower, G. C. McLaughlin, and R. Surman, Formation of the rare-earth peak: Gaining insight into late-timer-process dynamics, Phys. Rev. C85, 045801 (2012)

    2012

  8. [14]

    Miernik, K

    K. Miernik, K. P. Rykaczewski, C. J. Gross,et al., Largeβ-Delayed One and Two Neutron Emission Rates in the Decay of 86Ga, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 132502 (2013)

    2013

  9. [15]

    Yokoyama, R

    R. Yokoyama, R. Grzywacz, B. C. Rasco,et al., Strong one-neutron emission from two- neutron unbound states inβdecays of ther-process nuclei 86,87Ga, Phys. Rev. C100, 031302 (2019)

    2019

  10. [16]

    V. H. Phong, S. Nishimura, G. Lorusso,et al.,β-Delayed One and Two Neutron Emis- sion Probabilities Southeast of 132Sn and the Odd-Even Systematics inr-Process Nuclide Abundances, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 172701 (2022). 91

    2022

  11. [17]

    Dyszel, R

    P. Dyszel, R. Grzywacz, Z. Y. Xu,et al.(IDS Collaboration), Firstβ-Delayed Two-Neutron Spectroscopy of ther-Process Nucleus 134In and Observation of thei 13/2 Single-Particle Neutron State in 133Sn, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 152501 (2025)

    2025

  12. [18]

    Z. Y. Xu, M. Madurga, R. Grzywacz,et al., 133In: A Rosetta Stone for Decays ofr-Process Nuclei, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 022501 (2023)

    2023

  13. [19]

    Madurga, S

    M. Madurga, S. V. Paulauskas, R. Grzywacz,et al., Evidence for Gamow-Teller Decay of 78Ni Core from Beta-Delayed Neutron Emission Studies, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 092502 (2016)

    2016

  14. [20]

    Tolosa-Delgado, J

    A. Tolosa-Delgado, J. Agramunt, J. Tain,et al., Commissioning of the BRIKEN detector for the measurement of very exoticβ-delayed neutron emitters, Nuclear Instruments and Meth- ods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment925, 133 (2019)

    2019

  15. [21]

    Peltier, Z

    J. Peltier, Z. Xu, I. Cox,et al., The evidence ofN= 16 shell closure andβ-delayed neutron emission from 25F, Physics Letters B866, 139576 (2025)

    2025

  16. [22]

    Heideman, D

    J. Heideman, D. P´ erez-Loureiro, R. Grzywacz,et al., Conceptual design and first results for a neutron detector with interaction localization capabilities, Nuclear Instruments and Meth- ods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment946, 162528 (2019)

    2019

  17. [23]

    Z. Y. Xu, R. Grzywacz, A. Gottardo,et al., Compound-Nucleus and Doorway-State Decays ofβ-Delayed Neutron Emitters 51,52,53K, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 042501 (2024)

    2024

  18. [24]

    Piersa, A

    M. Piersa, A. Korgul, L. M. Fraile,et al.(IDS Collaboration),βdecay of 133In:γemission from neutron-unbound states in 133Sn, Phys. Rev. C99, 024304 (2019)

    2019

  19. [25]

    Z. Y. Xu, M. Madurga, R. Grzywacz,et al.,β-delayed neutron spectroscopy of 133In, Physical Review C108, 014314 (2023)

    2023

  20. [26]

    Erler, N

    J. Erler, N. Birge, M. Kortelainen,et al., The limits of the nuclear landscape, Nature486, 509 (2012)

    2012

  21. [27]

    Smith and P

    G. Smith and P. Simms, Centroid-shift measurement of the mean lifetimes of the 316 and 612 keV states of 192Pt, Nuclear Physics A202, 409 (1973)

    1973

  22. [28]

    FRIB Decay Station initiator,https://fds.ornl.gov/initiator/(2023)

    2023

  23. [29]

    J. C. Hardy, L. C. Carraz, B. Jonson, and P. G. Hansen, The essential decay of pandemonium: A demonstration of errors in complex beta-decay schemes, Phys. Lett. B71, 307 (1977). 92

    1977

  24. [30]

    Algora, D

    A. Algora, D. Jordan, J. L. Ta ´ ın,et al., Reactor Decay Heat in 239Pu: Solving theγDis- crepancy in the 4–3000-s Cooling Period, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 202501 (2010)

    2010

  25. [31]

    B. C. Rasco, K. P. Rykaczewski, A. Fija lkowska,et al., Completeβ-decay pattern for the high- priority decay-heat isotopes 137I and 137Xe determined using total absorption spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. C95, 054328 (2017)

    2017

  26. [32]

    Woli´ nska-Cichocka, B

    M. Woli´ nska-Cichocka, B. C. Rasco, K. P. Rykaczewski,et al., Completeβ-decay patterns of 142Cs,142 Ba,and 142La determined using total absorption spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. C107, 034303 (2023)

    2023

  27. [33]

    Spyrou, S

    A. Spyrou, S. N. Liddick, F. Naqvi,et al., Strong Neutron-γCompetition above the Neutron Threshold in the Decay of 70Co, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 142701 (2016)

    2016

  28. [34]

    Fija lkowska, M

    A. Fija lkowska, M. Karny, K. P. Rykaczewski,et al., Impact of Modular Total Absorption Spectrometer measurements ofβdecay of fission products on the decay heat and reactor νe flux calculation, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 052503 (2017)

    2017

  29. [35]

    Guadilla, A

    V. Guadilla, A. Algora, J. L. Tain,et al., Large Impact of the Decay of Niobium Isomers on the Reactor νe Summation Calculations, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 042502 (2019)

    2019

  30. [36]

    Dembskiet al., Extreme shape coexistence observed in 70Co, Communications Physics8, 77 (2025)

    C. Dembskiet al., Extreme shape coexistence observed in 70Co, Communications Physics8, 77 (2025)

    2025

  31. [37]

    Stukel, L

    M. Stukel, L. Hariasz, P. C. F. Di Stefano,et al.(KDK Collaboration), Rare 40K Decay with Implications for Fundamental Physics and Geochronology, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 052503 (2023)

    2023

  32. [38]

    Karny, A

    M. Karny, A. Fija lkowska, R. Grzywacz,et al., Design of a new central module for the Mod- ular Total Absorption Spectrometer, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms463(2019)

    2019

  33. [39]

    Shuai, B

    P. Shuai, B. C. Rasco, K. P. Rykaczewski,et al., Determination ofβ-decay feeding patterns of 88Rb and 88Kr using the Modular Total Absorption Spectrometer at ORNL HRIBF, Phys. Rev. C105, 054312 (2022)

    2022

  34. [40]

    Stepaniuk, M

    M. Stepaniuk, M. Karny, A. Fija lkowska,et al., Decay studies of theβ-delayed neutron emitters 87Br and 88Br measured by means of the Modular Total Absorption Spectrometer at ORNL HRIBF, Phys. Rev. C110, 054321 (2024)

    2024

  35. [41]

    A. C. Dombos, D.-L. Fang, A. Spyrou,et al., Total absorption spectroscopy of theβdecay of 76Ga, Phys. Rev. C93, 064317 (2016). 93

    2016

  36. [42]

    Lyons, A

    S. Lyons, A. Spyrou, S. N. Liddick,et al., 69,71Coβ-decay strength distributions from total absorption spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. C100, 025806 (2019)

    2019

  37. [43]

    Naqvi, S

    F. Naqvi, S. Karampagia, A. Spyrou,et al., Total absorption spectroscopy measurement on neutron-rich 74,75Cu isotopes, Nuclear Physics A1018, 122359 (2022)

    2022

  38. [44]

    L. D. Keukeleere, D. Rozpedzik, N. Severijns,et al., A first extraction of the weak magnetism form factor and Fierz interference term from the 114In→ 114Sn Gamow-Teller transition (2024), arXiv:2404.03140 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  39. [45]

    Vanlangendonck,The effect of weak magnetism on the shape of the 114In beta energy spectrum, Ph.D

    S. Vanlangendonck,The effect of weak magnetism on the shape of the 114In beta energy spectrum, Ph.D. thesis, KU Leuven (2023)

    2023

  40. [46]

    Monreal and J

    B. Monreal and J. A. Formaggio, Relativistic cyclotron radiation detection of tritium de- cay electrons as a new technique for measuring the neutrino mass, Physical Review D80, 10.1103/physrevd.80.051301 (2009)

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.80.051301 2009

  41. [47]

    Byron, H

    W. Byron, H. Harrington, R. J. Taylor,et al.(He6-CRES Collaboration), First Observation of Cyclotron Radiation from MeV-Scalee ± following NuclearβDecay, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 082502 (2023)

    2023

  42. [48]

    Naviliat-Cuncic, Searches for exotic interactions in nuclear beta decay,Proceedings, 11th Latin American Symposium on Nuclear Physics and Applications: Medellin, Colombia, AIP Conf

    O. Naviliat-Cuncic, Searches for exotic interactions in nuclear beta decay,Proceedings, 11th Latin American Symposium on Nuclear Physics and Applications: Medellin, Colombia, AIP Conf. Proc.1753, 060001 (2016)

    2016

  43. [49]

    Hughes, E

    M. Hughes, E. A. George, O. Naviliat-Cuncic,et al., Measurement of the 20F half-life, Phys. Rev. C97, 054328 (2018)

    2018

  44. [50]

    Kanafani, X

    M. Kanafani, X. Fl´ echard, O. Naviliat-Cuncic,et al., Precision measurements in the beta decay of 6He, EPJ Web of Conferences282, 01010 (2023)

    2023

  45. [51]

    Fretwellet al.(BeEST), Direct Measurement of the 7BeL/KCapture Ratio in Ta-Based Superconducting Tunnel Junctions, Phys

    S. Fretwellet al.(BeEST), Direct Measurement of the 7BeL/KCapture Ratio in Ta-Based Superconducting Tunnel Junctions, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 032701 (2020), arXiv:2003.04921 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  46. [52]

    Friedrichet al., Limits on the Existence of sub-MeV Sterile Neutrinos from the Decay of7Be in Superconducting Quantum Sensors, Phys

    S. Friedrichet al., Limits on the Existence of sub-MeV Sterile Neutrinos from the Decay of7Be in Superconducting Quantum Sensors, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 021803 (2021), arXiv:2010.09603 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  47. [53]

    Smolskyet al., Direct experimental constraints on the spatial extent of a neutrino wavepacket, Nature 10.1038/s41586-024-08479-6 (2025)

    J. Smolskyet al., Direct experimental constraints on the spatial extent of a neutrino wavepacket, Nature 10.1038/s41586-024-08479-6 (2025). 94

    doi:10.1038/s41586-024-08479-6 2025

  48. [54]

    Roca-Maza and N

    X. Roca-Maza and N. Paar, Nuclear equation of state from ground and collective excited state properties of nuclei, Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics101, 96 (2018)

    2018

  49. [55]

    Meng,Relativistic Density Functional for Nuclear Structure, International Review of Nu- clear Physics, Vol

    J. Meng,Relativistic Density Functional for Nuclear Structure, International Review of Nu- clear Physics, Vol. 10 (World Scientific, Singapore, 2016)

    2016

  50. [56]

    Bender, P.-H

    M. Bender, P.-H. Heenen, and P.-G. Reinhard, Self-consistent mean-field models for nuclear structure, Rev. Mod. Phys.75, 121 (2003)

    2003

  51. [57]

    L. M. Robledo, T. R. Rodr ´ ıguez, and R. R. Rodr ´ ıguez-Guzm´ an, Mean field and beyond description of nuclear structure with the Gogny force: a review, Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics46, 013001 (2018)

    2018

  52. [58]

    Stone and P.-G

    J. Stone and P.-G. Reinhard, The Skyrme interaction in finite nuclei and nuclear matter, Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics58, 587 (2007)

    2007

  53. [59]

    Nakatsukasa, K

    T. Nakatsukasa, K. Matsuyanagi, M. Matsuo,et al., Time-dependent density-functional de- scription of nuclear dynamics, Rev. Mod. Phys.88, 045004 (2016)

    2016

  54. [60]

    P. G. Reinhard and K. Goeke, The generator coordinate method and quantised collective motion in nuclear systems, Reports on Progress in Physics50, 1 (1987)

    1987

  55. [61]

    Hohenberg and W

    P. Hohenberg and W. Kohn, Inhomogeneous Electron Gas, Phys. Rev.136, B864 (1964)

    1964

  56. [62]

    Kohn and L

    W. Kohn and L. J. Sham, Self-Consistent Equations Including Exchange and Correlation Effects, Phys. Rev.140, A1133 (1965)

    1965

  57. [63]

    Nikˇ si´ c, D

    T. Nikˇ si´ c, D. Vretenar, and P. Ring, Relativistic nuclear energy density functionals: Mean- field and beyond, Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics66, 519 (2011)

    2011

  58. [64]

    Vretenar, A

    D. Vretenar, A. Afanasjev, G. Lalazissis,et al., Relativistic Hartree–Bogoliubov theory: static and dynamic aspects of exotic nuclear structure, Physics Reports409, 101 (2005)

    2005

  59. [65]

    Suhonen,From nucleons to nucleus: concepts of microscopic nuclear theory(Springer Science & Business Media, 2007)

    J. Suhonen,From nucleons to nucleus: concepts of microscopic nuclear theory(Springer Science & Business Media, 2007)

    2007

  60. [66]

    Holinde, Two-nucleon forces and nuclear matter, Physics Reports68, 121 (1981)

    K. Holinde, Two-nucleon forces and nuclear matter, Physics Reports68, 121 (1981)

    1981

  61. [67]

    Machleidt, F

    R. Machleidt, F. Sammarruca, and Y. Song, Nonlocal nature of the nuclear force and its impact on nuclear structure, Physical Review C53, R1483 (1996)

    1996

  62. [68]

    R. B. Wiringa, V. Stoks, and R. Schiavilla, Accurate nucleon-nucleon potential with charge- independence breaking, Physical Review C51, 38 (1995)

    1995

  63. [69]

    Sarriguren, E

    P. Sarriguren, E. Moya de Guerra, A. Escuderos,et al.,βdecay and shape isomerism in 74Kr, Nuclear Physics A635, 55 (1998). 95

    1998

  64. [70]

    N. Paar, P. Papakonstantinou, H. Hergert,et al., Collective multipole excitations based on correlated realistic nucleon-nucleon interactions, Phys. Rev. C74, 014318 (2006)

    2006

  65. [71]

    Beaujeault-Taudi` ere, M

    Y. Beaujeault-Taudi` ere, M. Frosini, J.-P. Ebran,et al., Zero- and finite-temperature electro- magnetic strength distributions in closed- and open-shell nuclei from first principles, Phys. Rev. C107, L021302 (2023)

    2023

  66. [72]

    N. Paar, P. Ring, T. Nikˇ si´ c,et al., Quasiparticle random phase approximation based on the relativistic Hartree-Bogoliubov model, Phys. Rev. C67, 034312 (2003)

    2003

  67. [73]

    N. Paar, T. Nikˇ si´ c, D. Vretenar,et al., Quasiparticle random phase approximation based on the relativistic Hartree-Bogoliubov model. II. Nuclear spin and isospin excitations, Phys. Rev. C69, 054303 (2004)

    2004

  68. [74]

    Nakatsukasa, T

    T. Nakatsukasa, T. Inakura, and K. Yabana, Finite amplitude method for the solution of the random-phase approximation, Phys. Rev. C76, 024318 (2007)

    2007

  69. [75]

    Gambacurta, M

    D. Gambacurta, M. Grasso, and J. Engel, Gamow-Teller Strength in 48Ca and 78Ni with the Charge-Exchange Subtracted Second Random-Phase Approximation, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 212501 (2020)

    2020

  70. [76]

    Litvinova, P

    E. Litvinova, P. Ring, and V. Tselyaev, Particle-vibration coupling within covariant density functional theory, Phys. Rev. C75, 064308 (2007)

    2007

  71. [77]

    Litvinova, P

    E. Litvinova, P. Ring, and V. Tselyaev, Relativistic quasiparticle time blocking approxima- tion: Dipole response of open-shell nuclei, Phys. Rev. C78, 014312 (2008)

    2008

  72. [78]

    S. R. Stroberg, S. K. Bogner, H. Hergert, and J. D. Holt, Nonempirical Interactions for the Nuclear Shell Model: An Update, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.69, 307 (2019), arXiv:1902.06154 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  73. [79]

    Coraggio, G

    L. Coraggio, G. De Gregorio, T. Fukui, A. Gargano, Y. Z. Ma, Z. H. Cheng, and F. R. Xu, The role of three-nucleon potentials within the shell model: Past and present, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.134, 104079 (2024), arXiv:2309.02314 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  74. [80]

    Caurier, G

    E. Caurier, G. Martinez-Pinedo, F. Nowacki, A. Poves, and A. P. Zuker, The Shell Model as Unified View of Nuclear Structure, Rev. Mod. Phys.77, 427 (2005), arXiv:nucl-th/0402046

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  75. [81]

    Seng, Radiative Corrections to Semileptonic Beta Decays: Progress and Challenges, Particles4, 397 (2021), arXiv:2108.03279 [hep-ph]

    C.-Y. Seng, Radiative Corrections to Semileptonic Beta Decays: Progress and Challenges, Particles4, 397 (2021), arXiv:2108.03279 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  76. [82]

    Gennari, M

    M. Gennari, M. Drissi, M. Gorchtein,et al., Ab Initio Strategy for Taming the Nuclear- Structure Dependence ofV ud Extractions: The 10C→ 10 B Superallowed Transition, Phys. 96 Rev. Lett.134, 012501 (2025)

    2025

  77. [83]

    Z. Li, T. Miyagi, and A. Schwenk, Ab Initio Calculations ofβ-Decay Half-Lives forN= 50 Neutron-Rich Nuclei, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 182501 (2026)

    2026

  78. [84]

    Hergert, A Guided Tour ofab initioNuclear Many-Body Theory, Front

    H. Hergert, A Guided Tour ofab initioNuclear Many-Body Theory, Front. in Phys.8, 379 (2020), arXiv:2008.05061 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  79. [85]

    H. W. Hammer, S. K¨ onig, and U. van Kolck, Nuclear effective field theory: status and perspectives, Rev. Mod. Phys.92, 025004 (2020), arXiv:1906.12122 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  80. [86]

    Carlson, S

    J. Carlson, S. Gandolfi, F. Pederiva,et al., Quantum Monte Carlo methods for nuclear physics, Rev. Mod. Phys.87, 1067 (2015), arXiv:1412.3081 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

Showing first 80 references.