Spectral line-shape in collinear laser spectroscopy after atomic charge exchange

Adam Dockery; Alejandro Ortiz Cortes; Brooke Rickey; Kei Minamisono

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 27 references

Spectral line-shape in collinear laser spectroscopy after atomic charge exchange

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The distortion in fast-beam laser spectra is electron-capture decay, not secondary collisions.

desk verdict A useful, mostly honest line-shape model for CLS after charge exchange, with a real mechanism claim and a few hand-picked inputs that deserve sensitivity testing before the 'no free parameters' slogan is taken at face value. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.20197 v1 pith:6REKIJA6 submitted 2025-08-27 physics.atom-ph nucl-ex

Adam Dockery , Kei Minamisono , Alejandro Ortiz Cortes , Brooke Rickey This is my paper · ORCID

classification physics.atom-phnucl-ex PACS 32.70.-n34.70.+e

keywords collinearlaserspectroscopychargeexchangeline-shapedistortionhyperfinestructurekineticenergyspreadfastneutralbeamsatomicpopulationsimulation

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper sets out to explain the distorted resonance line-shapes seen in collinear laser spectroscopy of fast neutral beams, where ions are neutralized by charge exchange with alkali vapor before laser interrogation. It argues that the distortion comes chiefly from electrons landing in many different projectile energy levels, each with its own reaction energy deficit, and from the decay cascades that follow—not from secondary inelastic collisions in the vapor as earlier analyses assumed. The authors build a simulated line shape from calculated charge-exchange cross sections, spontaneous-decay rates, and per-level kinetic-energy classes, so the shape itself has no free parameters. Measured aluminum, silicon, and nickel hyperfine spectra are reproduced, and repeated aluminum measurements show lower centroid scatter than fits using one satellite peak or a skewed profile. If correct, the model offers a parameter-free way to extract centroids and hyperfine constants from low-statistics spectra of rare isotopes, and it makes the choice of alkali vapor a tunable design parameter.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is a kinetic-energy-resolved population vector: for each electronic level that captures an electron, the simulation tracks not only its population but also the velocity class produced by that capture state's energy defect. Spontaneous decay redistributes population among electronic levels without mixing velocity classes, so after the flight path each observed state is a superposition of components with different centroids and widths. These components are summed—after binning by frequency—into a Gaussian-Lorentzian mixture profile whose component amplitudes are fixed by the simulation. Only the overall centroid, two widths, and the Lorentzian fraction are free; the satelli

What would settle it

Measure the longitudinal velocity distribution of a neutralized beam just after the charge-exchange cell with an electrostatic energy analyzer, for instance on the aluminum ground state after Al+ on sodium. The model predicts a dominant unshifted direct component plus a roughly 40% component broadened with a Gaussian half-width equal to one third of the energy defect; recovering a materially different width or amplitude ratio would falsify the simulated shape, and a high-statistics spectrum fitted with a floating satellite would show whether any residual structure remains.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the asymmetric charge-exchange distortion is dominated by capture into many levels of the projectile and subsequent spontaneous decay, with each populated level forming its own velocity class, rather than by secondary inelastic collisions. The paper shows that a simulated line shape—built from semi-classical capture cross sections, decay cascades using tabulated spontaneous-decay rates, and a bookkeeping that keeps each level's kinetic-energy shift separate—reproduces the measured hyperfine spectra of Al, Si, and Ni with no shape free parameters beyond the overall centroid, the Gaussian and Lorentzian widths, and the Lorentzian fraction. For the 27Al 3s25s transitio

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the energy kick from a capture state spreads along the laser axis like a bell curve whose half-width is one third of the kick energy (the paper takes the kick energy as three standard deviations); the cascade component that creates the observed distortion is shaped by this assumed spread, so the 'no free parameters' claim depends on it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Asymmetric charge-exchange spectra can be fitted with the simulated profile, removing the free satellite amplitude, satellite distance, or skew parameters and stabilizing fits at low count rates.
Centroid reproducibility improves: repeated 27Al measurements of the 3s25s transition scatter by 2.7 MHz with the simulation, versus 3.8 MHz for one-satellite and 3.4 MHz for skewed fits.
The same simulation, with no shape parameters, captures three qualitatively different distortions—an Al shoulder, a Ni skew, a Si kink—supporting generalization to other projectile-alkali pairs.
At high alkali vapor density the model deviates because secondary inelastic collisions become significant; the paper identifies this regime as needing new secondary-collision cross sections and recommends operating below the shift threshold.
Simulated line shapes for different alkali vapors allow experiments to choose a charge-exchange partner that gives a smoother or more separable resonance, which is useful for rare-isotope measurements.

Reading between the lines

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

For isotope chains, the simulated shape will change slightly with mass through the transition sensitivity and capture cross sections; fitting each isotope with its own simulated shape, rather than one common shape, should make mass-dependent residual shifts largely cancel—a testable prediction for existing isotope-shift data.
The same bookkeeping could be inverted: high-precision spectra taken at low vapor density provide a direct experimental check on calculated capture-state populations, effectively measuring charge-exchange cross sections through optical line shapes.
Because the distortion scales inversely with mass and level density, the model predicts that very light elements beyond Al will show the strongest shape effects in fast-beam experiments, making them the sharpest test between multi-level capture and secondary-collision mechanisms.
The assumed one-third-energy-defect Gaussian width is the least constrained input; a direct measurement of the neutral beam's longitudinal energy spread would either validate it or show where that rule needs replacement, without undermining the multi-level-capture core of the claim.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Worth a serious referee. The genuinely new thing is the construction of the line shape from per-level kinetic-energy classes after multi-level capture and decay, rather than the usual phenomenological satellite or skew. The model is not fitted to the spectra; the component amplitudes and positions come from cross sections, level energies, and decay rates. That is a real prediction, and it reproduces three quite different distortion morphologies (Al shoulder, Ni skew, Si kink). The vapor-pressure scan is also a good falsifiability handle: the model breaks down exactly where secondary collisions should matter. And the improvement in centroid scatter at low statistics, though modest, is a concrete benefit for rare-isotope work.

Now the soft spots. The stress-test note is right that the 'no free parameters' phrase is too strong. The ΔE/3 broadening rule in Sec. 4.1 is an assumption, not a derivation, and since ~40% of the final ground-state population comes from higher-lying states, that assumption directly shapes the cascade component that produces the distortion. Likewise f=1 and the Ei choice in Sec. 4.2 set the direct-to-cascade amplitude ratio. There is no sensitivity analysis for any of these. A different but still reasonable broadening rule would change the component balance and therefore the fitted centroid. So the model is better described as fixed-parameter rather than parameter-free. That said, the paper is transparent about these choices, and the multi-species agreement plus the vapor scan gives me confidence the mechanism is basically right even if the quantitative shape is not uniquely determined.

Two more weaknesses, minor in proportion. Agreement with data is asserted visually; there are no chi-squared or residual comparisons between methods. And the absolute centroids differ by up to ~60 MHz between line-shape models; the authors argue this cancels in isotope shifts and collinear-anticollinear measurements, which is plausible but not demonstrated. Also the new Al data and the simulation code are not public ('detailed elsewhere', no repository), so the central comparison is not independently checkable.

Bottom line: this is a solid, honest methods paper from a group that knows the experiment. The mechanism claim is well-supported enough to deserve referee time, and the model will likely be useful in practice. I would ask the authors for a sensitivity analysis of the ΔE/3 rule and the f/Ei choices, and for the code and data to be released, before accepting. But it is not a desk reject and not a reject on the merits.

Who is this for: anyone doing collinear laser spectroscopy of neutral beams, especially for rare isotopes. I would not bring it to a general physics reading group, but it belongs in a specialized one. I would cite it if I were working on CLS line shapes.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents a simulation-based model for the resonance line shape observed in collinear laser spectroscopy (CLS) of fast neutral beams produced by asymmetric charge exchange in an alkali vapor cell. The model computes charge-exchange cross sections (Sec. 4.2), evolves the resulting excited-state populations through spontaneous decay cascades (Secs. 4.3-4.4), and constructs a spectral profile from kinetic-energy-resolved components, with the broadening of endothermic capture states estimated from the reaction energetics (Secs. 4.1, 4.5). The resulting 'simulation' line shape has no free shape parameters beyond the usual centroid, widths, and Lorentzian fraction. It is compared with Al hyperfine spectra taken in fluorescence and resonant-ionization modes, and with previously measured Si and Ni spectra. The authors claim that the often-used satellite-peak or skewed profiles, motivated by secondary inelastic collisions, are not needed; instead the dominant distortion arises from capture into many projectile states followed by decay cascades that produce distinct projectile kinetic-energy classes. The simulated profile reproduces different distortion morphologies (Al shoulder, Ni skew, Si kink) and yields comparable or smaller centroid scatter than conventional phenomenological fits, with particular improvement in low-statistics spectra.

Significance. If the mechanism claimed here is correct, this is a practically important result for CLS of short-lived nuclei: it replaces phenomenological satellite peaks or skew parameters with a physically motivated line shape, improving reliability of centroid extraction in low-statistics spectra of rare isotopes. The paper's strength is that one parameter-free simulated shape accounts for three qualitatively different measured distortion patterns, and the vapor-pressure scan (Sec. 6.3) shows model breakdown precisely in the regime where secondary collisions are expected to become important. The approach also gives a design tool for choosing the exchange vapor. However, the central 'no free parameters' claim currently rests on several hand-picked physical inputs -- the ΔE/3 broadening rule of Sec. 4.1, the statistical factor f=1 and mean ionization energy Ei of Sec. 4.2 -- without a reported sensitivity study. Since these inputs directly set the amplitude and width of the cascade-fed component that produces the distortion, the mechanism claim is defensible but not yet fully secured. The paper is a useful contribution to atomic-spectroscopy methodology, with the caveat that the quantitative un

major comments (3)

[Sec. 4.1 and 4.5, Eq. (18) and the 'ΔE>0' bullet] The broadening of endothermic capture components is set by the assumption that ΔE is the tail-to-center range of a normal distribution, taken as 3σ, giving a Gaussian HWHM of ΔE/3 added in quadrature to the fitted width. Section 4.4 states that roughly 40% of the final ground-state population arrives via higher-lying capture states, so this assumed distribution directly shapes the cascade component that produces the observed distortion. No microscopic justification or sensitivity test is given. The authors should refit the Al, Si, and Ni spectra with alternative, equally plausible distributions (e.g., uniform over [−ΔE,+ΔE], triangular, or Gaussian HWHM ΔE/2 and ΔE/4) and report the resulting centroids and residuals. If the centroids are stable at the sub-MHz level and the visual distortion morphologies persist, the mechanism claim is robust; if not, the 'no free parameters' characteriza
[Sec. 4.2, Eqs. (8)-(9)] The initial exchange populations depend on two ambiguous inputs: the statistical factor f, set to 1 because 'attempts to evaluate it have yielded nonphysical results,' and the mean ionization energy Ei, chosen as the mean between projectile and target ionization potentials. These choices determine the relative cross sections for direct ground-state capture versus capture into higher states, i.e., the direct-to-cascade amplitude ratio. A different but still reasonable choice of f or Ei could change the component balance and hence the fitted centroid. The authors should provide a sensitivity scan over f and Ei, or cite experimental validation for the chosen values. Without this, the central claim that the line shape is predicted rather than fitted is weakened.
[Tables 2-3 and Fig. 6] The practical claim that the simulation method 'performs better' than one-satellite or skewed fits is based on small improvements in standard deviation (e.g., 2.7 MHz vs 3.4-3.8 MHz for the 3s25s transition over 35 measurements) and mean fit uncertainty. No uncertainty on the standard deviations or a statistical test is reported. The improvement may be real, especially at low statistics, but the reader cannot assess its significance. A bootstrap or F-test comparison, or at least reporting the number of points and the scatter of each fit parameter, would strengthen the conclusion.

minor comments (5)

[Sec. 4.1] The conversion from 'ΔE is 3σ' to 'HWHM is ΔE/3' is not numerically consistent for a Gaussian; the HWHM of a Gaussian with σ = ΔE/3 is 1.177σ ≈ 0.392ΔE. This should be clarified or corrected.
[Sec. 4.4, Eq. (17)] The index convention for D^n in Eq. (17) should be stated explicitly (whether D^n_{kk'} propagates population from level k' to level k). The text around Eqs. (15)-(17) would benefit from a short matrix-index definition.
[References] Reference [26] contains a typo ('Kurusz' instead of 'Kurucz'); the URL is given but no access date. Several references in the text (e.g., [6], [7], [17]) use inconsistent formatting, and the Si/Ni experimental papers are cited without page numbers in the text.
[Sec. 5.2, Table 2] The statement 'all mean centroid values are given relative to 1.129898 × 10^9 MHz' is clear, but the same convention is used in Table 3 with a different reference frequency; it would help to state the reference explicitly in each caption.
[Reproducibility] No code or data repository is mentioned. Since the method involves a multi-step numerical simulation with hundreds of components, releasing the simulation code (or a supplementary implementation) would substantially aid reproducibility and community adoption. This is not demanded for acceptance but is strongly suggested.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the fixed line-shape is computed from cross sections, decay rates, and kinetic-energy classes, then compared to external spectra; no fitted shape parameter is being renamed a prediction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. Section 4.2 computes initial capture populations from the Rapp–Francis/Dewangan cross section formulas, Eq. (8)-(9). Section 4.3 evolves those populations using Kurucz Einstein coefficients, Eq. (10)-(14). Section 4.4 introduces kinetic-energy classes for each entry state, Eq. (15)-(17), and Section 4.5 converts those populations into a fixed multi-component pseudo-Voigt profile, Eq. (18)-(19). The only fitted parameters in the analysis are the overall centroid, widths, and Lorentzian fraction; the relative amplitudes and positions of the distortion components are fixed by the simulation and are not adjusted to the spectra. The benchmark data include previously published Si and Ni spectra (refs. [6,7]) and new Al measurements; using one's own earlier measurements as test data is not circular because those data are not used to determine the shape parameters. The ΔE/3 broadening rule and f=1/E_i choices (Sec. 4.1-4.2) are acknowledged assumptions, not parameters fitted to the resonance spectra, so they do not constitute 'prediction by construction.' No equation in the paper is defined in terms of an output of the fit, no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no load-bearing conclusion is justified solely by a self-citation. The lack of sensitivity studies for these physical assumptions is a robustness/correctness issue, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The simulated line-shape is only as reliable as its inputs: Rapp-Francis cross sections (with hand-set f = 1 and Ei), Kurucz level and Einstein coefficient data, the assumed ΔE/3 kinetic-energy spread, and the assumption that secondary inelastic collisions are negligible in the operating vapor-density window. The free parameters are not fitted to spectra, but their values are chosen by stated rules, and the paper gives no sensitivity analysis showing how the line-shape or conclusions change when they vary.

free parameters (4)

statistical factor f = 1
Angular-momentum-matching statistical factor in the Rapp-Francis cross section is set to f = 1 because its evaluation is ambiguous and gave nonphysical results (Sections 4.1-4.2). Directly scales the relative capture cross sections that set the line-shape component amplitudes.
mean ionization energy Ei = mean of projectile and target IPs from occupied levels
The Rapp-Francis theory leaves Ei ambiguous; the authors choose the mean between the ionization potentials of projectile and target from the electronic levels they occupy (Section 4.2). Affects gamma and hence all cross sections.
excess-energy broadening scale = HWHM = ΔE/3
For ΔE > 0, the z-axis kinetic energy distribution is assumed normal with 3σ = ΔE, so HWHM = ΔE/3 (Section 4.1). This sets the width of the dominant distorted components in the predicted line-shape and is purely assumed.
impact-parameter cutoff b1 = chosen where integral stabilizes before oscillation
Cross-section integral Eq. 8 is cut at b1 chosen by inspection to avoid nonphysical oscillations (Section 4.2). Affects absolute and relative cross sections.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption Rapp-Francis semi-classical perturbation theory with the Dewangan correction gives valid relative capture cross sections for intermediate-velocity asymmetric charge exchange.
The entire population vector p0 (Eq. 10) rests on Eqs. 8-9. The theory is old and its ambiguities (f, Ei) are acknowledged; its accuracy for these systems is assumed.
ad hoc to paper The statistical factor f is 1, so angular momentum matching can be ignored.
Section 4.1: 'Due to ambiguity in evaluating this factor, and nonphysical results from attempts to evaluate it, the statistical factor is assumed to be one.' Explicit ad hoc choice, not derived.
ad hoc to paper Excess reaction energy is fully absorbed as projectile kinetic energy, with the z-projection spread modeled as normal with HWHM ΔE/3.
Section 4.1: 'The excess energy is assumed to be completely absorbed into the projectile... we assume that ΔE is the range from tail to center of a normal distribution, which is taken to be 3σ.' Load-bearing for the line-shape of the cascade-fed component.
domain assumption Secondary inelastic collisions are negligible at the operating vapor densities.
Section 4.1 assumption used to exclude Eqs. 3-6 from the model. Supported by the vapor-pressure scan in Section 6.3, which shows model breakdown only at high heater currents, but the scan is for Al-Na only.
domain assumption Spontaneous decay changes only the electronic level, not the beam kinetic energy class.
Section 4.4: the decay matrix D acts only on electronic levels, not on the kinetic energy index uk. Photon recoil and any velocity change during decay are neglected.
domain assumption Kurucz database energy levels and Einstein coefficients are accurate for all populated states.
Sections 4.2-4.3: all level energies and Aij coefficients are taken from the Kurucz database; errors propagate into populations and component positions.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Spectral line-shape in collinear laser spectroscopy after atomic charge exchange." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6REKIJA6

@misc{pith2026250820197,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Spectral line-shape in collinear laser spectroscopy after atomic charge exchange},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6REKIJA6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.20197}
}

read the original abstract

Collinear laser spectroscopy experiments on fast, neutral beams have been extensively used for studies on short-lived radioactive nuclei, taking advantage of its high sensitivity. The resulting resonance line-shape is known to show significant distortion, due to the energy exchange during the charge-exchange neutralization process, which can cause large systematic uncertainty in the determined centroid. A model for the line shape was constructed and simulated to be compared to measured Al, Si, and Ni hyperfine spectra. It is shown that the distortion is caused mainly by the transfer of electron into many different energy levels in the projectile atom and subsequent decays, rather than secondary inelastic collisions, which were often assumed in the line shape analysis before. The model can also be applied to other projectile-alkali pairs, providing a reliable line-shape with less fitting parameters than conventional phenomenological models.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.20197 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Schematic of the Experimental Beamline at BECOLA. Ions are generated as a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Charge Exchange Cross Sections and Populations for Al-Na Exchange. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (6 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Kinetic Energy Components Following Al-Na Exchange. The Al population [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Simulated Spectral Line-Shape for Al. In (a), the peak profile of one of the well [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Example Fitted Spectrum and Centroid Scatter in Al. In (a), an example [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_6.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Simulated Line-shape and Example Spectrum for Ni and Si. The simulated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_7.png]

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: CEC Temperature Dependence of Fitting Parameters. The hyperfine structure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_8.png]

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: Simulated Line-Shape for Al with Other Exchange Partners. The hyperfine [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

27 extracted references · 26 canonical work pages

[1]

X. F. Yang, S. J. Wang, S. G. Wilkins, R. F. G. Ruiz, Laser spectroscopy for the study of exotic nuclei, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 129 (2023) 104005

work page 2023
[2]

Miller, K

A. Miller, K. Minamisono, A. Klose, D. Garand, C. Kujawa, J. Lantis, Y. Liu, B. Maaß, W. Nazarewicz, W. N¨ orterh¨ auser, S. Pineda, P.-G. Reinhard, D. Rossi, F. Sommer, C. Sumithrarachchi, A. Teigelh¨ ofer, J. Watkins, Proton superfluidity and chare radii in proton-rich calcium isotopes, Nature Phys. 15 (2019) 432–436

work page 2019
[3]

Pineda, K

S. Pineda, K. K¨ onig, D. Rossi, B. Brown, A. Incorvati, J. Lantis, K. Minamisono, W. N¨ orterh¨ auser, J. Piekarewicz, R. Powel, F. Som- mer, Charge radius of neutron=defiicnet 54ni and symmetry energy con- straints using the difference in mirror pair charge radii, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127 (2021) 182503

work page 2021
[4]

Dockery, K

A. Dockery, K. K¨ onig, J. Lantis., Y. Liu, K. Minamisono., S. Pineda, R. Powel, Hyerfine structure of low-lying triplet states in 45sc ii, Phys. Rev. A 108 (2023) 052816

work page 2023
[5]

Klose, K

A. Klose, K. Minamisono, C. Geppert, N. Fr¨ ommgen, M. Hammen, J. Kr¨ amer, A. Krieger, P. Mantica, W. N¨ orterh¨ auser, S. Vinnikova, Tests of atomic charge-exchange cells for collinear laser spectroscopy, Nucl. Inst. and Meth. A 678 (2012) 114–121

work page 2012
[6]

K¨ onig, J

K. K¨ onig, J. Berengut, A. Borschevsky, A. Brinson, B. Brown, A. Dock- ery, S. Elhatisari, E. Eliav, R. G. Ruiz, J. Holt, B. Hu, J. Karthein, D. Lee, Y. Ma, U. Meißner, K. Minamisono, A. Oleynichenko, S. Pineda, S. Prosnyak, M. Reitsma, L. V. Skripnikov, A. Vernon, A. Zaitsevskii, Nuclear charge radii of silicon isotopes, Phy. Rev. Lett. 132 (2024) 162502

work page 2024
[7]

Sommer, K

F. Sommer, K. K¨ onig, D. Rossi, N. Everett, D. Garand, R. de Groote, J. Holt, P. Imgram, A. Incorvati, C. Kalman, A. Klose, J. Lantis, Y. Liu, A. Miller, K. Minamisono, T. Miyagi, W. Nazarewicz, W. N¨ ortersh¨ auser, S. Pineda, R. Powel, P. Reinhard, L. Renth, E. Romero-Romero, R. Roth, A. Schwenk, C. Sumithrarachchi, A. Teigelh¨ ofer, Charge radii of 55...

work page 2022
[8]

B. H. Bransden, Charge exchange in ion-atom collisions, Cont. Phys. 31 (1990) 19–33

work page 1990

Show all 27 references

[9]

D. Rapp, W. Francis, Charge exchange between gaseous ions and atoms, J. Chem. Phys. 37 (1962) 2631–2645

1962
[10]

H. S. W. Massey, R. A. Smith, The passage of positive ions through gases, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 142 (1933) 142–172

1933
[11]

D. R. Bates, R. McCarroll, Electron capture in slow collisions, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 245 (1958) 175–183

1958
[12]

L. I. Men’shikov, Ion-atom charge exchange at low energies, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 85 (1983) 1159–1167

1983
[13]

Macek, S

J. Macek, S. Alston, Theory of electron capture from a hydrogenlike ion by a bare ion, Phy. Rev. A 26 (1982) 250–270

1982
[14]

D. P. Dewangan, J. Eichler, Boundary conditions and the strong poten- tial born approximation for electron capture, J. Phys. B: Atom. Mol. Phys. 18 (1985) L65

1985
[15]

D. P. Dewangan, Dependence of symmetrical charge transfer cross sec- tion on ionization potential, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Phys. 6 (1973) L20– L23

1973
[16]

Sinha, J

S. Sinha, J. N. Bardsley, Symmetric charge transfer in low-energy ion- atom collisions, Phy. Rev. A 14 (1976) 104–112

1976
[17]

C. A. Ryder, K. Minamisono, H. B. Asberry, B. Isherwood, P. F. Man- tica, A. Miller, D. M. Rossi, R. Strum, Population distribution subse- quent to charge exchange of 29.85 kev ni+ on sodium vapor, Spectrochim Acta Part B At. Spectrosc. 113 (2015) 16

2015
[18]

Vernon, J

A. Vernon, J. Billowes, C. Binnersley, M. Bissell, T. Cocolios, G. Farooq- Smith, K. Flanagan, R. G. Ruiz, W. Gins, R. de Groote, ´A. Kozor´ us, K. Lynch, G. Neyens, C. Ricketts, K. Wendt, S. Wilkins, X. Yang, Simu- lation of the relative atomic populations of elements 1≤ z ≤ ...

2019
[19]

Bendali, H

N. Bendali, H. Duong, P. Juncar, J. S. Jalm, J. Vialle, Na+-na charge exchange processes studied by collinear laser spectroscopy, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Phys. 19 (1986) 233–238

1986
[20]

Kirchner, A

T. Kirchner, A. L. Ford, J. F. Reading, Springer handbook of atomic, molecular, and optical physics 2nd edition, Springer, 2023, Ch. 53 Ion- atom and atom-atom collisions, pp. 785–794

2023
[21]

Minamisono, P

K. Minamisono, P. Mantica, A. Klose, S. Vinnikova, A. Schneider, B. Johnson, B. Barquest, Commisioning of the collinear laser spec- troscopy system in the becola facility at nscl, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 709 (2013) 85–94

2013
[22]

B. R. Barqeust, G. Bollen, P. F. Mantica, K. Minamisono, R. Ringle, S. Schwarz, C. Sumithrarachchi, Rfq beam cooler and buncher for collinear laser spectroscopy of rare isotopes, Nucl. Instrum. A 866 (2017) 18–28

2017
[23]

S. L. Kaufman, High-resolution laser spectroscopy in fast beams, Optic. Comm. 17 (1976) 309

1976
[24]

B. Maaß, K. K¨ onig, J. Kr¨ amer, A. Miller, W. N¨ orterh¨ auser, F. Sommer, A 4π fluorescence detection region for collinear laser spectroscop, arXiv: 2007.02658 (2020)

2007 arXiv
[25]

Reponen, V

M. Reponen, V. Sonnenschein, T. Sonoda, H. Tomita, M. Oohashi, D. Matsui, M. Wada, Towards in-jet resonance ionization spectroscopy: An injection-locked titanium: Sapphire laser system for the palis-facility, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. in Phys. Res. A 908 (2018) 236–243

2018
[26]

Kurusz, B

R. Kurusz, B. Cell, 1995 atomic line data kurucz (smithsonian astro- physical observatory, cambridge, ma). URL https://lweb.cfa.harvard.edu/amp/ampdata/kurucz23/sekur.html

1995
[27]

K¨ onig, K

K. K¨ onig, K. Minamisono, J. Lantis, S. Pineda, R. Powel, Beam energy determination via collienar laser spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. A 103 (2021) 032806. 32

2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

X. F. Yang, S. J. Wang, S. G. Wilkins, R. F. G. Ruiz, Laser spectroscopy for the study of exotic nuclei, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 129 (2023) 104005

work page 2023

[2] [2]

Miller, K

A. Miller, K. Minamisono, A. Klose, D. Garand, C. Kujawa, J. Lantis, Y. Liu, B. Maaß, W. Nazarewicz, W. N¨ orterh¨ auser, S. Pineda, P.-G. Reinhard, D. Rossi, F. Sommer, C. Sumithrarachchi, A. Teigelh¨ ofer, J. Watkins, Proton superfluidity and chare radii in proton-rich calcium isotopes, Nature Phys. 15 (2019) 432–436

work page 2019

[3] [3]

Pineda, K

S. Pineda, K. K¨ onig, D. Rossi, B. Brown, A. Incorvati, J. Lantis, K. Minamisono, W. N¨ orterh¨ auser, J. Piekarewicz, R. Powel, F. Som- mer, Charge radius of neutron=defiicnet 54ni and symmetry energy con- straints using the difference in mirror pair charge radii, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127 (2021) 182503

work page 2021

[4] [4]

Dockery, K

A. Dockery, K. K¨ onig, J. Lantis., Y. Liu, K. Minamisono., S. Pineda, R. Powel, Hyerfine structure of low-lying triplet states in 45sc ii, Phys. Rev. A 108 (2023) 052816

work page 2023

[5] [5]

Klose, K

A. Klose, K. Minamisono, C. Geppert, N. Fr¨ ommgen, M. Hammen, J. Kr¨ amer, A. Krieger, P. Mantica, W. N¨ orterh¨ auser, S. Vinnikova, Tests of atomic charge-exchange cells for collinear laser spectroscopy, Nucl. Inst. and Meth. A 678 (2012) 114–121

work page 2012

[6] [6]

K¨ onig, J

K. K¨ onig, J. Berengut, A. Borschevsky, A. Brinson, B. Brown, A. Dock- ery, S. Elhatisari, E. Eliav, R. G. Ruiz, J. Holt, B. Hu, J. Karthein, D. Lee, Y. Ma, U. Meißner, K. Minamisono, A. Oleynichenko, S. Pineda, S. Prosnyak, M. Reitsma, L. V. Skripnikov, A. Vernon, A. Zaitsevskii, Nuclear charge radii of silicon isotopes, Phy. Rev. Lett. 132 (2024) 162502

work page 2024

[7] [7]

Sommer, K

F. Sommer, K. K¨ onig, D. Rossi, N. Everett, D. Garand, R. de Groote, J. Holt, P. Imgram, A. Incorvati, C. Kalman, A. Klose, J. Lantis, Y. Liu, A. Miller, K. Minamisono, T. Miyagi, W. Nazarewicz, W. N¨ ortersh¨ auser, S. Pineda, R. Powel, P. Reinhard, L. Renth, E. Romero-Romero, R. Roth, A. Schwenk, C. Sumithrarachchi, A. Teigelh¨ ofer, Charge radii of 55...

work page 2022

[8] [8]

B. H. Bransden, Charge exchange in ion-atom collisions, Cont. Phys. 31 (1990) 19–33

work page 1990