pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.21547 · v1 · pith:CO5MYTIPnew · submitted 2026-06-19 · ⚛️ nucl-th

A short-range effective theory for single-neutron halo nuclei with a deformed core

Live-Palm Kubushishi , Daniel R. Phillips This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 12:39 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ nucl-th
keywords halo nucleieffective field theorydeformed coreparticle-rotor modelCoulomb breakupasymptotic normalization coefficients11Be17C
0
0 comments X

The pith

A leading-order particle-plus-rotor effective theory with short-range operators describes the spectra and breakup of single-neutron halo nuclei with deformed cores.

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

The paper constructs a short-range effective theory for systems where a neutron is weakly bound to a deformed core that possesses a low-lying rotational band. At leading order this reduces to the particle-plus-rotor model supplemented by a finite set of short-range operators that respect the symmetries and power counting of the problem. Explicit calculations for the positive-parity states of 11Be and 17C below the core(2+) plus neutron threshold show that the spectrum can be renormalized with these leading-order operators and matches observed energies. Leading-order predictions for Coulomb dissociation cross sections also agree reasonably with existing data, while s-wave asymptotic normalization coefficients display regulator dependence of a size consistent with next-to-leading-order corrections.

Core claim

The spectrum is accurately described at leading order in both cases. Leading-order results are in reasonable agreement with data for both 11Be and 17C. The addition of one next-to-leading-order operator renders the ANCs of all s-wave states stable with respect to the regulator and removes most of the 30% variation of the leading-order Coulomb dissociation cross section with the regulator.

What carries the argument

The particle-plus-rotor model of Bohr and Mottelson at leading order, together with a finite set of short-range operators that respect the symmetries and small parameters of the system.

If this is right

  • The low-lying positive-parity energies below the core(2+)-neutron threshold can be renormalized using only the leading-order set of operators.
  • Decay widths to d-wave core-neutron states retain sizable cutoff dependence while s-wave ANCs show only next-to-leading-order-sized regulator dependence.
  • Leading-order Coulomb breakup observables for both 11Be and 17C are in reasonable agreement with experimental data.
  • Inclusion of one next-to-leading-order operator stabilizes the ANCs of all s-wave states with respect to the regulator.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same leading-order framework could be applied to other single-neutron halo candidates whose cores also exhibit low-lying rotational bands.
  • If the power counting holds, the size of regulator dependence at leading order supplies a direct estimate of the theoretical uncertainty on unmeasured observables.
  • The approach supplies a systematic way to quantify how core deformation propagates into halo observables without requiring a full microscopic calculation at every step.

Load-bearing premise

A valid power counting exists based on the small parameters of the system so that the particle-plus-rotor model plus a finite set of short-range operators at leading order captures the essential low-energy physics without higher-order corrections dominating the observables of interest.

What would settle it

A measurement of the s-wave asymptotic normalization coefficients or the Coulomb dissociation cross section in 11Be or 17C that deviates substantially from the leading-order prediction even after the single next-to-leading-order operator is included would falsify the central claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.21547 by Daniel R. Phillips, Live-Palm Kubushishi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Leading order calculations of the B(E1) distributio [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: B(E1) distributions (left panel) and Coulomb breaku [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Beyond leading order calculations of the B(E1) distr [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Beyond leading order calculations of the B(E1) distr [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We establish a short-range effective theory for deformed s-wave halos. The theory applies to a system in which neutrons are weakly bound to a core nucleus, and that core nucleus also exhibits a low-lying rotational band with a $0^+$ ground state and a first $2_1^+$ excited state. The effective theory then must have both halo degrees of freedom and degrees of freedom associated with rotation of the core. This leads to the particle plus rotor model of Bohr and Mottelson at leading order. We identify the relevant leading-order operators in the Hamiltonian that respect the symmetries of the system and the small parameters which define the effective theory's power counting. We carry out calculations for the $^{11}$Be and $^{17}$C systems in which we compute the low-lying positive-parity states of the core $+$ neutron systems up to the core$(2_1^+)$-neutron threshold. We do this for several different regulator parameters and establish that these energies can be renormalized using the leading-order set of operators. The spectrum is accurately described at leading order in both cases. Decay widths to d-wave core-neutron states have sizable cutoff dependence, but the Asymptotic Normalization Coefficients (ANCs) in $s$-wave channels exhibit regulator dependence of a size consistent with next-to-leading-order effects. We also compute Coulomb breakup observables and compare with experimental data, finding leading-order results in reasonable agreement with data for both ${}^{11}$Be and ${}^{17}$C. The addition of one next-to-leading-order operator renders the ANCs of all s-wave states stable with respect to the regulator. It consequently also removes most of the 30\% variation of the leading-order Coulomb dissociation cross section with the regulator.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper establishes a short-range effective theory for single-neutron halo nuclei with deformed cores, reducing at leading order to the particle-plus-rotor model with additional short-range operators. It identifies small parameters for power counting and applies the framework to 11Be and 17C, computing low-lying positive-parity states up to the core(2+)-neutron threshold. Spectra are renormalized at LO with accurate data agreement; s-wave ANCs show NLO-sized regulator dependence; LO Coulomb breakup observables agree reasonably with experiment. One NLO operator stabilizes ANCs and reduces most of the 30% LO cutoff variation in cross sections.

Significance. If the power counting holds, the work supplies a systematic EFT for deformed halo nuclei that incorporates core rotation and halo degrees of freedom, enabling controlled predictions for spectra, ANCs, and reaction observables such as Coulomb breakup. The explicit renormalization at LO and the regulator stabilization at NLO for key quantities demonstrate practical utility for low-energy nuclear structure and reactions.

major comments (2)
  1. [Power counting discussion] Power counting section: the central claim requires a valid power counting in which higher-order corrections do not dominate, yet no explicit expansion parameter (e.g., ratio of core excitation energy to halo binding or momentum scales) is supplied and no NLO calculation of the spectrum itself is performed to quantify LO accuracy beyond parameter adjustment.
  2. [Results for 11Be and 17C] Results for decay widths and ANCs: the sizable cutoff dependence reported for d-wave widths is load-bearing for the assertion that the LO description is controlled, as it indicates that regulator independence is not achieved for all observables at the claimed order.
minor comments (2)
  1. Specify the precise operator content and fitting procedure for the LO couplings, including how the regulator cutoff is varied and how uncertainties are propagated to the Coulomb breakup cross sections.
  2. Clarify the numerical size of the NLO/LO ratio for the ANCs and breakup observables to make the improvement at NLO quantitative.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments. We respond point-by-point to the major comments below. Revisions will be made to provide an explicit numerical estimate of the expansion parameter and to clarify the expected cutoff dependence for d-wave observables.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Power counting section: the central claim requires a valid power counting in which higher-order corrections do not dominate, yet no explicit expansion parameter (e.g., ratio of core excitation energy to halo binding or momentum scales) is supplied and no NLO calculation of the spectrum itself is performed to quantify LO accuracy beyond parameter adjustment.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit numerical estimate of the expansion parameter strengthens the power counting discussion. The manuscript identifies the relevant small parameters in Section II as the ratios of halo momentum scales to core rotational and excitation energies. In the revision we will add a paragraph supplying numerical estimates of these ratios (approximately 0.4 for 11Be and 0.3 for 17C). A complete NLO spectrum calculation lies beyond the present scope; the LO renormalization and data agreement already provide supporting evidence for the power counting, but we acknowledge that direct NLO quantification would be desirable in future work. revision: partial

  2. Referee: Results for decay widths and ANCs: the sizable cutoff dependence reported for d-wave widths is load-bearing for the assertion that the LO description is controlled, as it indicates that regulator independence is not achieved for all observables at the claimed order.

    Authors: The sizable cutoff dependence in d-wave decay widths is expected, as these channels are suppressed at leading order by the centrifugal barrier and enter only at higher orders in the EFT power counting. The LO framework targets s-wave halo observables, for which the s-wave ANCs display regulator dependence of NLO size, as reported. We will revise the text to state explicitly that regulator independence at LO is claimed for the primary s-wave spectra and ANCs, while d-wave quantities are anticipated to require NLO operators for full stability. This distinction preserves the main conclusions while addressing the concern. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper identifies small parameters of the halo-plus-rotor system, constructs the leading-order particle-plus-rotor Hamiltonian plus short-range contact operators, fits the finite set of LO couplings to the low-lying positive-parity spectrum of 11Be and 17C, and then computes independent observables (s-wave ANCs, d-wave widths, and Coulomb breakup cross sections) for comparison with external experimental data. Reasonable LO agreement with breakup data, plus NLO stabilization of ANCs, constitutes a standard EFT validation against independent benchmarks rather than any reduction of outputs to inputs by construction. No self-definitional loops, fitted quantities renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the described chain. The power-counting assumption is stated explicitly but does not render the reported results tautological.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a small number of short-range couplings that are fitted to spectra and on the assumption that the chosen power counting organizes the expansion for these nuclei.

free parameters (2)
  • leading-order short-range coupling constants
    Adjusted to reproduce the low-lying spectra of the core-plus-neutron systems.
  • regulator cutoff parameter
    Varied to verify that physical quantities become independent of the cutoff once renormalization is performed.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption A separation of scales exists that permits a short-range EFT with a well-defined power counting for deformed s-wave halos.
    Invoked to justify truncating the Hamiltonian at leading order and to identify which operators are relevant.
  • standard math The Hamiltonian operators must respect the rotational and parity symmetries of the system.
    Used to select the allowed leading-order terms that reduce to the particle-rotor model.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5851 in / 1601 out tokens · 35881 ms · 2026-06-26T12:39:09.870788+00:00 · methodology

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

92 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    In this limit each rotational band can be treated according to the discussion in Ref

    Erotor ≪ Ehalo For halo nuclei where the characteristic energy scale of the rotor Erotor is small, but non- zero, compared to the energy scale of the halo, the rotor states form rotational bands, with the inter-band spacing governed by E halo. In this limit each rotational band can be treated according to the discussion in Ref. [27]. The rotor motion can ...

  2. [2]

    Deformation a ppears in such a theory only as a sub-leading effect

    Erotor ≫ Ehalo In the regime where the rotor energy scale lies well above the halo en ergy scale the decoupling theorem tells us that the theory may be recast as an EFT in which the rotor degree of freedom is integrated out of the theory. Deformation a ppears in such a theory only as a sub-leading effect. For example, the contribution of the qu adrupole op...

  3. [3]

    In this regime, def ormation becomes a leading-order effect, and the quadrupole operator (19) and the contact term (2) both contribute to the halo-core interaction at leading order

    Erotor ∼ Ehalo When the characteristic energies of halo and rotational excitation s are of a similar size, the hierarchy between the different operators contributing to th e effective potential V eff cn must be modified from the standard Halo EFT counting. In this regime, def ormation becomes a leading-order effect, and the quadrupole operator (19) and the con...

    2003

  4. [5]

    Tanihataet al., Phys

    I. Tanihata, H. Hamagaki, O. Hashimoto, Y. Shida, N. Yosh ikawa, K. Sugimoto, O. Yamakawa, T. Kobayashi, and N. Takahashi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 2676 (1985), URL https://link.aps. org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.55.2676

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.55.2676 1985

  5. [6]

    P. G. Hansen and B. Jonson, Europhys. Lett. 4, 409 (1987), URL https://dx.doi.org/10. 1209/0295-5075/4/4/005

    1987

  6. [7]

    Tanihata, J

    I. Tanihata, J. Phys. G 22, 157 (1996), URL https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/22/ 2/004

    work page doi:10.1088/0954-3899/22/ 1996

  7. [8]

    Riisager, Rev

    K. Riisager, Rev. Mod. Phys. 66, 1105 (1994), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ RevModPhys.66.1105

    1994

  8. [9]

    I. J. Thompson, Computer Physics Reports 7, 167 (1988), ISSN 0167-7977, URL https: //www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0167797788900056

    arXiv 1988

  9. [10]

    T. Misu, W. Nazarewicz, and S. ˚ Aberg, Nuclear Physics A 614, 44 (1997), ISSN 0375-9474, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0375947496004587

    1997

  10. [11]

    A. S. Jensen, K. Riisager, D. V. Fedorov, and E. Garrido, R ev. Mod. Phys. 76, 215 (2004), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.76.215

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.76.215 2004

  11. [12]

    Al-Khalili, in Halo Nuclei (Morgan & Claypool Publishers, 2017), 2053-2571, pp

    J. Al-Khalili, in Halo Nuclei (Morgan & Claypool Publishers, 2017), 2053-2571, pp. 2–1 to 2–9, ISBN 978-1-6817-4581-7, URL https://doi.org/10.1088/978-1-6817-4581-7ch2

    work page doi:10.1088/978-1-6817-4581-7ch2 2017

  12. [13]

    A. M. Moro, J. Casal, and M. G´ omez-Ramos, The European P hysical Journal A 61, 47 (2025), ISSN 1434-601X, URL https://doi.org/10.1140/epja/s10050-025-01500-0

    work page doi:10.1140/epja/s10050-025-01500-0 2025

  13. [14]

    Hammer, C

    H.-W. Hammer, C. Ji, and D. R. Phillips, Journal of Physi cs G: Nuclear and Particle Physics 44, 103002 (2017), URL https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1361-6471/aa83db

    work page doi:10.1088/1361-6471/aa83db 2017

  14. [15]

    D. B. Kaplan, M. J. Savage, and M. B. Wise, Phys. Lett. B 424, 390 (1998), nucl-th/9801034

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  15. [16]

    D. B. Kaplan, M. J. Savage, and M. B. Wise, Nucl. Phys. B 534, 329 (1998), nucl-th/9802075

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  16. [17]

    van Kolck, Nuclear Physics A 645, 273 (1999), ISSN 0375-9474, URL https://www

    U. van Kolck, Nuclear Physics A 645, 273 (1999), ISSN 0375-9474, URL https://www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0375947498006125

    1999

  17. [18]

    M. C. Birse, J. A. McGovern, and K. G. Richardson, Phys. L ett. B 464, 169 (1999), hep- ph/9807302

    arXiv 1999

  18. [19]

    Braaten and H

    E. Braaten and H. W. Hammer, Phys. Rept. 428, 259 (2006), cond-mat/0410417. 22

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  19. [20]

    Bertulani, H.-W

    C. Bertulani, H.-W. Hammer, and U. van Kolck, Nuclear Ph ysics A 712, 37 (2002), ISSN 0375- 9474, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0375947402012708

    2002

  20. [21]

    Bedaque, H.-W

    P. Bedaque, H.-W. Hammer, and U. van Kolck, Physics Lett ers B 569, 159 (2003), ISSN 0370- 2693, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269303010712

    2003

  21. [22]

    Capel, D

    P. Capel, D. R. Phillips, and H.-W. Hammer, Phys. Rev. C 98, 034610 (2018), URL https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.98.034610

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.98.034610 2018

  22. [23]

    Yang and P

    J. Yang and P. Capel, Phys. Rev. C 98, 054602 (2018), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevC.98.054602

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.98.054602 2018

  23. [24]

    Moschini, J

    L. Moschini, J. Yang, and P. Capel, Phys. Rev. C 100, 044615 (2019), URL https://link. aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.100.044615

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.100.044615 2019

  24. [25]

    Hebborn and P

    C. Hebborn and P. Capel, Phys. Rev. C 104, 024616 (2021), URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.104.024616

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.104.024616 2021

  25. [26]

    Rupak and R

    G. Rupak and R. Higa, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 222501 (2011), URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.222501

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.106.222501 2011

  26. [27]

    Zhang, K

    X. Zhang, K. M. Nollett, and D. Phillips, Physics Letter s B 751, 535 (2015), ISSN 0370-2693, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269315008515

    2015

  27. [28]

    Papenbrock and H

    T. Papenbrock and H. A. Weidenm¨ uller, Physica Scripta 91, 053004 (2016), URL https: //doi.org/10.1088/0031-8949/91/5/053004

    work page doi:10.1088/0031-8949/91/5/053004 2016

  28. [29]

    Papenbrock and H

    T. Papenbrock and H. A. Weidenm¨ uller, Phys. Rev. C 102, 044324 (2020)

    2020

  29. [30]

    I. K. Alnamlah, E. A. Coello P´ erez, and D. R. Phillips, P hys. Rev. C 104, 064311 (2021), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.104.064311

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.104.064311 2021

  30. [31]

    I. K. Alnamlah, E. A. C. P´ erez, and D. R. Phillips, Front iers in Physics 10, 901954 (2022)

    2022

  31. [32]

    Bohr and B

    A. Bohr and B. Mottelson, Nuclear Structure (W. A. Benjamin, New York, 1969)

    1969

  32. [33]

    J.-W. Chen, G. Rupak, and M. J. Savage, Nuclear Physics A 653, 386 (1999), ISSN 0375-9474, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0375947499002985

    1999

  33. [34]

    S. G. Nilsson, Tech. Rep. 16, Det Kongelige Danske Viden skabernes Selskab (1955), cERN Report CERN-55-30; scanned at CERN. :contentReference[oa icite:2]index=2

    1955

  34. [35]

    Esbensen and C

    H. Esbensen and C. N. Davids, Phys. Rev. C 63, 014315 (2000), URL https://link.aps. org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.63.014315

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.63.014315 2000

  35. [36]

    Capel, D

    P. Capel, D. R. Phillips, and H. W. Hammer, Phys. Lett. B 825, 136847 (2022), 2008.05898

    arXiv 2022

  36. [37]

    Kubushishi and P

    L.-P. Kubushishi and P. Capel, Exploring core excitation in halo nuclei using halo effectiv e field theory: an application to the bound states of 11be (2025), 2507.13585, URL https:// arxiv.org/abs/2507.13585

    arXiv 2025

  37. [38]

    Kubushishi and P

    L.-P. Kubushishi and P. Capel, Insensitivity of the coulomb breakup of halo nuclei to spectr o- scopic factors (2026), 2603.10339, URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.10339

    arXiv 2026

  38. [39]

    Esbensen, B

    H. Esbensen, B. A. Brown, and H. Sagawa, Phys. Rev. C 51, 1274 (1995), URL https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.51.1274

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.51.1274 1995

  39. [41]

    Thompson, F

    I. Thompson, F. Nunes, and B. Danilin, Comput. Phys. Com m. 161, 87 (2004), ISSN 0010- 4655, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010465504002140

    2004

  40. [43]

    Hesse, J.-M

    M. Hesse, J.-M. Sparenberg, F. Van Raemdonck, and D. Bay e, Nuclear Physics A 640, 37 (1998), ISSN 0375-9474, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0375947498004357. 23

    1998

  41. [44]

    The R matrix theory , volume=

    P. Descouvemont and D. Baye, Reports on Progress in Phys ics 73, 036301 (2010), URL https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0034-4885/73/3/036301

    work page doi:10.1088/0034-4885/73/3/036301 2010

  42. [45]

    Baye, Physics Reports 565, 1 (2015), ISSN 0370-1573, the Lagrange-mesh method, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370157314004086

    D. Baye, Physics Reports 565, 1 (2015), ISSN 0370-1573, the Lagrange-mesh method, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370157314004086

    2015

  43. [46]

    B. I. Schneider, Phys. Rev. A 24, 1 (1981), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevA.24.1

    1981

  44. [47]

    Descouvemont and M

    P. Descouvemont and M. Vincke, Phys. Rev. A 42, 3835 (1990), URL https://link.aps. org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.42.3835

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.42.3835 1990

  45. [48]

    Descouvemont and J

    P. Descouvemont and J. Dohet-Eraly, Few Body Syst. 65, 9 (2024)

    2024

  46. [49]

    Alder and A

    K. Alder and A. Winther, Electromagnetic Excitation: Theory of Coulomb Excitation wi th Heavy Ions (North-Holland Publishing Company, 1975), ISBN 978044410 8265, URL https: //books.google.com/books?id=azet0AEACAAJ

    1975

  47. [50]

    C. A. Bertulani and G. Baur, Physics Reports 163, 299 (1988), ISSN 0370-1573, URL https: //www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0370157388901421

    arXiv 1988

  48. [51]

    Typel and G

    S. Typel and G. Baur, Nuclear Physics A 759, 247 (2005), ISSN 0375-9474, URL https: //www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0375947405008493

    2005

  49. [52]

    Al-Khalili and K

    J. Al-Khalili and K. Arai, Phys. Rev. C 74, 034312 (2006), URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.74.034312

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.74.034312 2006

  50. [53]

    Descouvemont, Computer Physics Communications 200, 199 (2016), ISSN 0010-4655, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010465515003951

    P. Descouvemont, Computer Physics Communications 200, 199 (2016), ISSN 0010-4655, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010465515003951

    2016

  51. [54]

    Typel and R

    S. Typel and R. Shyam, Phys. Rev. C 64, 024605 (2001), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevC.64.024605

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.64.024605 2001

  52. [55]

    Capel, D

    P. Capel, D. Baye, and V. S. Melezhik, Phys. Rev. C 68, 014612 (2003), URL https://link. aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.68.014612

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.68.014612 2003

  53. [56]

    Esbensen, G

    H. Esbensen, G. F. Bertsch, and K. A. Snover, Phys. Rev. L ett. 94, 042502 (2005), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.042502

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.94.042502 2005

  54. [57]

    Capel and D

    P. Capel and D. Baye, Phys. Rev. C 71, 044609 (2005), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevC.71.044609

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.71.044609 2005

  55. [58]

    Capel and Y

    P. Capel and Y. Nollet, Phys. Rev. C 96, 015801 (2017), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevC.96.015801

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.96.015801 2017

  56. [59]

    D. Baye, P. Capel, and G. Goldstein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 082502 (2005), URL https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.082502

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.95.082502 2005

  57. [60]

    Goldstein, D

    G. Goldstein, D. Baye, and P. Capel, Phys. Rev. C 73, 024602 (2006), URL https://link. aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.73.024602

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.73.024602 2006

  58. [62]

    Capel, P

    P. Capel, P. Danielewicz, and F. M. Nunes, Phys. Rev. C 82, 054612 (2010), URL https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.82.054612

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.82.054612 2010

  59. [63]

    Crespo, A

    R. Crespo, A. Deltuva, and A. M. Moro, Phys. Rev. C 83, 044622 (2011), URL https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.83.044622

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.83.044622 2011

  60. [64]

    A. M. Moro and R. Crespo, Phys. Rev. C 85, 054613 (2012), URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.85.054613

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.85.054613 2012

  61. [65]

    Capel, D

    P. Capel, D. Phillips, and H.-W. Hammer, Physics Letter s B 825, 136847 (2022), ISSN 0370- 2693, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269321007875

    2022

  62. [66]

    Deltuva and D

    A. Deltuva and D. Jurˇ ciukonis, Physics Letters B 840, 137867 (2023), ISSN 0370-2693, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269323002010. 24

    2023

  63. [67]

    N. K. Timofeyuk and P. Descouvemont, Phys. Rev. C 81, 051301 (2010), URL https:// link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.81.051301

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.81.051301 2010

  64. [68]

    K. Amos, L. Canton, P. Fraser, S. Karataglidis, J. Svenn e, and D. van der Knijff, Nu- clear Physics A 879, 132 (2012), ISSN 0375-9474, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S037594741200053X

    2012

  65. [69]

    Smalley, H

    D. Smalley, H. Iwasaki, P. Navr´ atil, R. Roth, J. Langha mmer, V. M. Bader, D. Bazin, J. S. Berryman, C. M. Campbell, J. Dohet-Eraly, et al., Phys. Rev. C 92, 064314 (2015), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.92.064314

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.92.064314 2015

  66. [70]

    S. Kim, J. Hwang, Y. Satou, N. Orr, T. Nakamura, Y. Kondo, J. Gibelin, N. Achouri, T. Aumann, H. Baba, et al., Physics Letters B 836, 137629 (2023), ISSN 0370-2693, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269322007638

    2023

  67. [71]

    L. H. Chien and P. Descouvemont, Phys. Rev. C 108, 044605 (2023), URL https://link. aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.108.044605

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.108.044605 2023

  68. [72]

    Punta, J

    P. Punta, J. A. Lay, and A. M. Moro, Phys. Rev. C 108, 024613 (2023), URL https://link. aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.108.024613

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.108.024613 2023

  69. [73]

    Punta, J

    P. Punta, J. A. Lay, A. M. Moro, and G. Col` o, Phys. Rev. C 111, 064614 (2025), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/nj6g-fsj4

    work page doi:10.1103/nj6g-fsj4 2025

  70. [74]

    Suhara, Y

    T. Suhara, Y. Taniguchi, W. Horiuchi, S. Watanabe, and T . Furumoto, Phys. Rev. C 111, 054301 (2025), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.111.054301

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.111.054301 2025

  71. [75]

    Punta, J

    P. Punta, J. A. Lay, A. M. Moro, J. Lois-Fuentes, and B. Fe rn´ andez-Dom ´ ınguez,Constraining the n = 16 shell gap in 17c via transfer to the continuum in the 16c(d, p )17c reaction (2026), 2604.14423, URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.14423

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  72. [76]

    Kanada-En’yo, H

    Y. Kanada-En’yo, H. Horiuchi, and A. Dot´ e, Phys. Rev. C 60, 064304 (1999), URL https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.60.064304

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.60.064304 1999

  73. [77]

    A. McCoy, in HaloWeek’24 - nuclei at and beyond the driplines (Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden, 2024), URL https://indico.cern.ch/event/1319370/ contributions/5984436/

    arXiv 2024

  74. [79]

    Kelley, E

    J. Kelley, E. Kwan, J. Purcell, C. Sheu, and H. Weller, Nu clear Physics A 880, 88 (2012), ISSN 0375-9474, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0375947412000413

    2012

  75. [80]

    Elekes, Z

    Z. Elekes, Z. Dombr` adi, R. Kanungo, H. Baba, Z. F¨ ul¨ op, J. Gibelin, A. Horvath, E. Ideguchi, Y. Ichikawa, N. Iwasa, et al., Physics Letters B 614, 174 (2005), ISSN 0370-2693, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269305004703

    2005

  76. [81]

    H. G. Bohlen, R. Kalpakchieva, W. von Oertzen, T. N. Mass ey, A. A. Ogloblin, G. de Angelis, M. Milin, C. Schulz, T. Kokalova, and C. Wheldon, The Europea n Physical Journal A 31, 279 (2007), ISSN 1434-601X, URL https://doi.org/10.1140/epja/i2006-10275-5

    work page doi:10.1140/epja/i2006-10275-5 2007

  77. [83]

    Calci, P

    A. Calci, P. Navr´ atil, R. Roth, J. Dohet-Eraly, S. Quag lioni, and G. Hupin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 242501 (2016), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.242501

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.117.242501 2016

  78. [84]

    Ajzenberg-Selove, Nuclear Physics A 490, 1 (1988), ISSN 0375-9474, URL https://www

    F. Ajzenberg-Selove, Nuclear Physics A 490, 1 (1988), ISSN 0375-9474, URL https://www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0375947488901248

    arXiv 1988

  79. [85]

    Arai, Phys

    K. Arai, Phys. Rev. C 69, 014309 (2004), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevC.69.014309. 25

    2004

  80. [86]

    Ogawa, K

    Y. Ogawa, K. Arai, Y. Suzuki, and K. Varga, Nuclear Physi cs A 673, 122 (2000), ISSN 0375- 9474, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0375947400001330

    2000

Showing first 80 references.