Reference Quadrupole Moments of Transition Elements from Lamb Shifts in Muonic Atoms

B. Ohayon; K. von Schoeler; P. Indelicato; S. Rathi

REVIEW 2 major objections 8 minor 60 references

Reference Quadrupole Moments of Transition Elements from Lamb Shifts in Muonic Atoms

T0 review · 2 major / 8 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Muonic Lamb-shift spectroscopy with microcalorimeters could pin down nuclear quadrupole moments of transition elements to ten times better accuracy.

desk verdict Credible feasibility study for microcalorimeter muonic Lamb-shift quadrupole moments; but the paper's own ~1% EFG-calculability floor caps improvement at factor 3–7 for five of seven nuclides, not the claimed order of magnitude. read the letter →

arxiv 2511.17546 v2 pith:DCVXVE2J submitted 2025-11-10 physics.atom-ph nucl-ex

S. Rathi , K. von Schoeler , P. Indelicato , B. Ohayon This is my paper · ORCID

classification physics.atom-phnucl-ex PACS 36.10.-k21.10.Ky

keywords muonicatomsLambshiftquadrupolemomentsmicrocalorimetershyperfinestructuretransitionelementselectricfieldgradientx-rayspectroscopy

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

The paper argues that the weakly populated 2s1/2→2p3/2 'Lamb shift' transition in muonic atoms of the light transition metals (vanadium through zinc) can be resolved with cryogenic microcalorimeters despite its low yield. If that holds, the quadrupole hyperfine coupling B extracted from the resolved hyperfine lines would determine reference quadrupole moments Q with up to an order of magnitude better accuracy than current table values, and those improved references would propagate through the ratio B/B_ref=Q/Q_ref to every measured isotope in each chain. The feasibility argument rests on detailed calculations of energies, linewidths, branching ratios, and cascade populations, plus simulations of photon transmission and muon-induced background. The paper's bottom line is that a signal of roughly one photon per hour above a comparable background would suffice for a factor-of-ten gain within days of measurement.

What carries the argument

The mechanism that carries the argument is the muonic 2s1/2→2p3/2 Lamb-shift transition in a hydrogen-like muonic atom. The muon's proximity to the nucleus amplifies the electric field gradient by roughly 10^7, making the electric quadrupole hyperfine parameter B (tens to hundreds of eV) comparable to the fine-structure splitting and therefore spectroscopically accessible. The transition's intrinsic weakness (~4–5% 2s population, ~25–28% branching ratio) is offset by microcalorimeters that combine high quantum efficiency with ~10 eV resolution, and the analysis accounts for static hyperfine mixing, natural linewidths, cascade feeding, photon self-absorption, and muon-induced background. The

What would settle it

Measure the 2s1/2→2p3/2 hyperfine spectrum of muonic 63Cu with a microcalorimeter at 10 eV resolution; if the extracted quadrupole moment differs from the accepted reference (220 mb) by more than the claimed factor-of-ten improvement, the neglected muonic corrections are too large. Alternatively, compute the nuclear-polarization correction to B for the 2p3/2 state in muonic Cu: if it exceeds a few eV, the method's absolute-accuracy target is not met.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the 2s1/2→2p3/2 transition in muonic atoms—whose quadrupole splitting B ranges from tens to hundreds of eV for Z=23–30 and whose natural linewidths are ~20–60 eV—can be observed with a microcalorimeter at ~10 eV resolution, even though only about 1.2% of stopped muons feed the transition via the 2s state. Because the muon enhances the electric field gradient by roughly seven orders of magnitude relative to electronic atoms, B is large enough to be measured from a few resolved hyperfine lines, after correcting for static hyperfine mixing between 2p1/2 and 2p3/2 sublevels of the same total angular momentum. The authors calculate that a day of measurement at one photon

Load-bearing premise

The paper assumes that corrections to the muonic quadrupole interaction—nuclear polarization, the finite spatial extent of the quadrupole distribution, and the vacuum-polarization modification of the E2 operator—are all negligible at the few-eV level; if any of them is not, the absolute quadrupole moment will not reach the claimed order-of-magnitude improvement.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the method works, reference quadrupole moments for 51V, 53Cr, 55Mn, 59Co, 61Ni, 63Cu, and 67Zn would improve by up to an order of magnitude, replacing values limited by open-shell electronic EFG calculations.
Because reference moments are transferred through B/B_ref=Q/Q_ref, a single improved measurement sharpens the quadrupole moments of dozens of isotopes and isomers in the copper, zinc, chromium, cobalt, and nickel chains.
The resolved hyperfine spectrum would provide an experimental benchmark for many-body calculations of electric field gradients in open-shell atoms and molecules.
The measured intensity of the isolated 13→7 contamination line could calibrate cascade simulations and thereby constrain the overlapping 12→7 line in the fit.
The approach would extend muonic-atom quadrupole measurements to elements lighter than Z=30, a range previously inaccessible to solid-state detectors and crystal spectrometers.

Reading between the lines

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

The assumed negligibility of nuclear polarization, finite quadrupole distribution, and vacuum-polarization modification of the E2 operator is only checked against current uncertainties (18–100 eV in B); if any correction exceeds a few eV, the absolute Q floor will sit above the claimed factor-of-ten gain for the elements with the largest B (Mn, Co, Cu).
The roughly 1% ceiling quoted for EFG calculability in muonic atoms suggests that even a perfect measurement may not reach a factor-of-ten improvement for elements already known to ~3% (e.g., Mn), unless that ceiling is beaten by dedicated nuclear-polarization calculations.
The technique's sensitivity could be extended to neighboring elements (Sc, Ti, Fe) or to isotopic targets of short-lived species if target fabrication and beam time allow, since the same cascade and background logic applies.
One testable extension would be to use the measured 13→7 line intensity as a live calibration of the cascade model, converting a contaminant into a systematic check.

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

Quick take: this is the first proposal I've seen that targets the weakly populated 2s–2p manifold in muonic atoms with microcalorimeters to extract reference quadrupole moments for Z=23–30. The resolution argument is solid — B values of 0.5–1.2 keV, MC resolution ~10 eV, natural widths 20–60 eV — and the simulated background is low enough (1.4 events/hour under the line) that the experiment looks plausible. The cascade and contamination estimates are honestly flagged as approximate.

What is genuinely new: previous muonic quadrupole work used crystal spectrometers for Z≤13 and solid-state detectors for Z≥30; microcalorimeters have been used for muonic x-rays but not for this transition. If the method works, the payoff is real — improving Q_ref anchors sharpens Q across dozens of isotopes and isomers via B/B_ref.

The soft spots, in order of size. First, the central accuracy claim overreaches against the paper's own assumptions. The Introduction states that EFGs can be calculated to ~1% accuracy, and beyond that nuclear polarization and finite quadrupole distribution become prohibitive. That sets a floor on Q accuracy near 1%. Yet the Conclusion claims order-of-magnitude improvement for all seven listed elements. The stress-test is right: for Mn (current 3%), Cu (6.8%), Zn (8%), Co (7%), and Ni (9%), a tenfold gain is impossible under that floor; the achievable gains are factors of 3–7. Only V (19%) and Cr (33%) can get a full order of magnitude. The 'up to an order of magnitude' in the abstract is technically true for the best cases, but the blanket conclusion is not, and the abstract's 'within a day' softens to 'within days' in the body. Second, the excluded corrections in Section II.A are dismissed as negligible compared to the current B uncertainties (18–100 eV), not compared to the few-eV target after improvement. That may be fine, but it needs a quantitative check; a few eV from nuclear polarization would floor the absolute Q accuracy. Third, the rate arithmetic has no error bars (detector acceptance 2e-4, cascade α calibrated on one element, alpha=-0.11 from muonic Fe), and the factor-of-two discrepancies in the text aren't reconciled. None of these kill the proposal; they turn it from a finished case into a strong motivation.

Who this is for: the muonic-atom and nuclear-moments community, and anyone planning rare-isotope quadrupole measurements at ISOLDE or similar. The paper deserves a serious referee — the experimental idea is specific and testable, and the simulations are extensive, even if the quantitative conclusions need tightening before publication.

Referee Report

2 major / 8 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a method for measuring reference electric quadrupole moments Q_ref of light transition elements (Z=23–30) by resolving the muonic 2s1/2→2p3/2 Lamb-shift transition (10–40 keV) with cryogenic microcalorimeters (≈10 eV FWHM). For seven candidate nuclides the authors compute transition energies, the quadrupole hyperfine parameter B=eQV_zz, natural linewidths, 2s populations (4.3–4.7%), and branching ratios (25–28%) using MCDFGME and the Akylas–Vogel cascade code. For the benchmark case 63Cu they optimize the muon momentum (24 MeV/c at PSI's PiE1 beamline), simulate photon transport through the target (GEANT4), identify two contaminating manifolds (12→7, 13→7), and simulate the muon-induced background in a maXs30-style MMC array. The resulting signal is ≈12 photons/hour with ≈1–1.4 background events/hour under the natural linewidth. The authors conclude that a day of measurement would improve Q_ref by up to an order of magnitude, with the improvement propagating to all isotopes in a chain through B/B_ref = Q/Q_ref.

Significance. If realized, the proposed method would fill a real gap: for open-shell transition metals, Q_ref is limited by EFG calculations in many-electron systems to fractional uncertainties of 3–33%, and muonic x-ray measurements were previously restricted to Z≥30 or Z≤13. The paper's strengths are concrete and checkable: the rate estimates are anchored to a real beamline (PiE1) and a real detector geometry (maXs30-based), the background simulation is decomposed by particle species, and the contamination analysis proposes an in-situ calibration handle (the 13→7 line) for the approximately known cascade. The authors are appropriately transparent about the approximate cascade and contamination calculations. However, the headline quantitative claim of an order-of-magnitude improvement is in tension with the paper's own stated ≈1% floor on EFG calculability, and no statistical error budget is provided to connect the simulated rates to a precision on B. The idea is promising and the feasibility evidence is largely sound, but the stated reach is overstated for most of the seven nuclides.

major comments (2)

[Introduction, bullet 2; §II.A; Table I; Conclusion] The blanket conclusion of "an improvement of quadrupole moments by an order of magnitude" is internally inconsistent with the paper's own ≈1% floor on EFG calculability. From Table I, 55Mn has Q=330(10) mb (3.0% accuracy); a tenfold improvement would require 0.3% total accuracy, below the stated 1% floor. The same logic caps the improvement for Co (7.1%), Ni (9.3%), Cu (6.8%), and Zn (8.2%) at factors of roughly 7–9; only V (19.2%) and Cr (33.3%) can reach a factor of ten. Moreover, §II.A excludes nuclear polarization, finite quadrupole distribution, and VP-modified E2 corrections "as their contributions to B are negligible compared to the uncertainty in Q" — a comparison against the pre-improvement B uncertainties (18–100 eV), not against the few-eV target (e.g., ≈2.3 eV for Mn) that an order-of-magnitude improvement implies. The paper should quantify or bound these corrections at the f
[§II.C–II.E and Conclusion] The claim that an order-of-magnitude improvement in B is reachable "within days" is not supported by a statistical error budget. The paper provides the signal rate (12 h⁻¹), background rate (≈1 h⁻¹ under the natural linewidth), natural linewidths Γ=22–59 eV, and 10 eV detector resolution, but never translates these inputs into an expected uncertainty on B from a fit of the hyperfine manifold. For the most challenging case, 51V, the target δB≈1.8 eV must be extracted from a compressed pattern (B=92 eV) with Γ=22 eV at ≈12 h⁻¹ total; for 63Cu, δB≈5.3 eV from a pattern with Γ=52 eV. A Monte-Carlo or Fisher-matrix projection of the fitted B for each isotope, including the 12→7 contamination line and the coincidence-cut background, is needed to substantiate the headline claim.

minor comments (8)

[Fig. 1 caption] "the potential improvement aimed based on" is grammatically awkward; rephrase.
[§II.C] "These Muons are captured" — capitalization of "Muons" mid-sentence.
[Fig. 4 caption] "Lorenzians" should be "Lorentzians".
[Ref. [47]] The URL contains a duplicated "https://https://".
[§II.D] The geometric acceptance of 2×10⁻⁴ is quoted from Ref. [44] but its origin (detector distance and active area relative to the source) should be stated in one sentence so the 12 h⁻¹ signal rate is reproducible without consulting Ref. [44].
[Table I] Iron (Z=26) is absent from the candidate list without comment. Presumably all stable Fe isotopes have I=0 or 1/2 and thus no spectroscopic quadrupole moment; state this explicitly. Also clarify the sign convention of B and note that the 18–100 eV B-uncertainty range derives directly from the Q uncertainties of Ref. [16].
[§II.C] The cascade parameter α=−0.11 is calibrated to muonic iron [41] and applied to all Z=23–30, and the initial population is set at n=20 with a modified statistical distribution. Since f(2s) directly sets the signal rate, a brief sensitivity statement (e.g., how f(2s) changes with α±0.05) would help.
[Abstract and Conclusion] The abstract says "within a day of measurement" while the conclusion says "within days"; align these statements, particularly because the per-isotope count rates and required precisions differ across Table I.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper is a forward feasibility simulation whose inputs (literature Q, external Fe cascade calibration, QUARTET geometry) are not re-derived as outputs.

full rationale

The derivation chain is a forward model. Table I uses literature Q values from Ref. [16] to compute B through Eq. (1) and simulated spectra; Q is an input, not an output, so no self-definitional loop exists. The cascade parameter alpha=-0.11 is calibrated against external muonic-Fe data (Ref. [41]), not against the target elements, and the detector acceptance comes from the QUARTET hardware design (Refs. [44,48]), which is external engineering evidence rather than an unverified self-referential claim. References [32] (charge radii) and [44]/[48] are co-authored by B. Ohayon, but they compile or describe independently checkable data/hardware and are not used to forbid alternatives. The claimed order-of-magnitude improvement is internally inconsistent for five of the seven nuclides because Section II.A excludes nuclear polarization, finite quadrupole distribution, and E2-operator modifications as negligible 'compared to the uncertainty in Q,' while the Introduction caps calculable EFG accuracy at ~1%; for 55Mn (3% current Q), 59Co (7%), 61Ni (9%), 63Cu (6.8%), and 67Zn (8%), a tenfold gain would require sub-1% accuracy. That is a correctness/consistency concern, not a circularity: the EFG is not fitted from the Q values being predicted, and no fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction. No step reduces by construction to its own input.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central feasibility claim depends on two families of inputs: (i) fitted or chosen simulation parameters (cascade alpha, Fermi thickness, detector acceptance) that set the signal rate and measurement-time estimate; (ii) unquantified domain assertions about the EFG model and the size of neglected corrections that set the accuracy floor. No new physical entities are introduced. The strongest unquantified input is the assertion that nuclear-polarization and finite-size corrections remain negligible at the target accuracy.

free parameters (3)

Cascade population parameter alpha = -0.11
Initial n=20 distribution (2l+1)exp(alpha*l) chosen to match measured versus calculated transition intensities in muonic Fe (Ref. 41); applied to all elements in Table I, where it sets f(2s)=4-5% and therefore the signal-rate and measurement-time estimates (Section II.C).
Fermi surface thickness a = 2.3 fm
Two-parameter Fermi charge distribution with fixed surface thickness 2.3 fm for all nuclei (Section II.A); a standard choice in muonic-atom analyses but it affects the bound-state wavefunctions and hence B, with no sensitivity study provided.
Detector geometric acceptance = 2e-4
Fraction of exiting photons reaching the active detector area, adopted from the QUARTET-style geometry of Ref. 44 (Section II.C); it converts the photon exit rate into the 12 photons/hour signal that underlies the one-day claim.

assumptions (7)

domain assumption MCDFGME computes muonic bound-state energies, transition rates, and the EFG accurately, including leading-order QED corrections to all orders (Section II.A).
The entire spectroscopy prediction rests on this code's accuracy; it is established tooling from one of the authors (Indelicato) but is not independently re-verified in this paper.
domain assumption The Akylas-Vogel cascade code with alpha=-0.11 reproduces the real muonic cascade in transition metals (Section II.C).
No direct measurement of the 2s population in Cu is available; the Fe calibration (Ref. 41) is extrapolated to all seven elements.
ad hoc to paper Neglected corrections (nuclear polarization, finite quadrupole distribution, VP-modified E2 operator) are negligible compared with the target uncertainty in B (Section II.A).
Asserted without numerical bounds; the comparison is made against the current Q uncertainty, the very quantity the method aims to reduce ~10x. This is the weakest assumption.
domain assumption The muonic EFG is calculable to about 1% before nuclear-polarization and finite-quadrupole corrections dominate (Introduction, bullet 2).
Sets the systematic floor for the accuracy claim; no per-element error budget is given.
domain assumption GEANT4 QGSP_BERT_EMZ and the simplified decay-cascade model in G4Beamline give a realistic estimate of the muon-induced background (Section II.E).
The authors state the simulated muonic x-ray energies/intensities are 'highly approximate', yet the 1.4 events/hour background conclusion depends on this model.
domain assumption The PiE1 beamline rate-versus-momentum curve (15 kHz at 24 MeV/c) applies to the proposed measurement (Section II.B, Ref. 36).
External beamline data drive the momentum optimization and the absolute rate estimates.
domain assumption The quadrupole splitting obeys B = eQVzz with the EFG essentially isotope-independent (Section I, Eq. 1, Ref. 2).
Standard hyperfine-ratio method used to propagate Q_ref to all isotopes; the isotope-independence of the EFG is the physical premise of the propagation.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Reference Quadrupole Moments of Transition Elements from Lamb Shifts in Muonic Atoms." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DCVXVE2J

@misc{pith2026251117546,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Reference Quadrupole Moments of Transition Elements from Lamb Shifts in Muonic Atoms},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DCVXVE2J}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2511.17546}
}

abstract

We present a novel method for accurately measuring the absolute electric quadrupole moments of light transition elements $(23 \leq Z \leq 30 )$. Our approach is based on performing precision muonic x-ray spectroscopy of the $2s-2p$ manifold, which is also referred to as the Lamb shift. These transitions are too weak to be detected with dispersive methods and too overlapping to be resolved by solid-state detectors. Here, we propose the use of cryogenic microcalorimeters, which possess high efficiency and excellent energy resolution in the relevant energy regime, coupled with state-of-the-art theoretical calculations. We demonstrate the feasibility of this approach by performing extensive calculations and realistic simulations. In this way, we establish that the uncertainty in the absolute moment, which is transferred to the quadrupole moments of all isotopes in the chain, could be reduced by up to an order of magnitude within a day of measurement. These precise reference quadrupole moments serve as valuable inputs for nuclear structure studies and for benchmarking state-of-the-art quantum chemistry calculations in open-shell elements.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.17546 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. Relative uncertainty in the measured [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. Estimation of the optimal muon implantation mo [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (2 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. Simulated spectrum of the area of interest in muonic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. Results of the muon-induced background simulation. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

[1]

Neyens, Nuclear magnetic and quadrupole moments for nuclear structure research on exotic nuclei, Reports on Progress in Physics66, 633 (2003)

G. Neyens, Nuclear magnetic and quadrupole moments for nuclear structure research on exotic nuclei, Reports on Progress in Physics66, 633 (2003)

2003
[2]

Neugart and G

R. Neugart and G. Neyens, Nuclear moments, The Eu- roschool Lectures on Physics with Exotic Beams, Vol. II (Lecture Notes in Physics, Vol. 700) , 135 (2006)

2006
[3]

Despite these advantages, the potential of muonic atoms to determineQ ref has been limited by the ca- pabilities of the available measurement techniques [19]

Unlike electronic systems, the electric quadrupole cou- pling dominates over that of the magnetic dipole, as mag- netic moments scale inversely with mass, thus simplifying the analysis. Despite these advantages, the potential of muonic atoms to determineQ ref has been limited by the ca- pabilities of the available measurement techniques [19]. The transiti...
[4]

Steffen, Precision measurements of nuclear quadrupole moments by muonic x rays, Hyperfine Interactions24, 223 (1985)

R. Steffen, Precision measurements of nuclear quadrupole moments by muonic x rays, Hyperfine Interactions24, 223 (1985)

1985
[5]

Koszor´ us, R

´A. Koszor´ us, R. De Groote, B. Cheal, P. Campbell, and I. Moore, Nuclear structure studies by collinear laser spectroscopy, The European Physical Journal A60, 20 (2024)

2024
[6]

B. H. Sun, C. Y. Liu, and H. X. Wang, Correlating double-difference of charge radii with quadrupole defor- mation and B(E2) in atomic nuclei, Physical Review C 95, 014307 (2017)

2017
[7]

The corresponding calcu- lated transition intensity is≈0.15 %

Although it does not strongly overlap with the region of interest, it may significantly hinderQextraction if a conventional HPGe detector is used for such measure- ments (as shown in Figure 4). The corresponding calcu- lated transition intensity is≈0.15 %. As this transition is expected to be isolated when using an MC detector, its measured magnitude may ...
[8]

Speidel, O

K.-H. Speidel, O. Kenn, and F. Nowacki, Magnetic mo- ments and nuclear structure, Progress in Particle and Nu- clear Physics49, 91 (2002)

2002

Show all 60 references

[9]

Reinhard and W

P.-G. Reinhard and W. Nazarewicz, Statistical corre- lations of nuclear quadrupole deformations and charge radii, Physical Review C106, 014303 (2022)

2022
[10]

X. Yang, T. Cocolios, and S. Geldhof, Probing the magic- ity and shell evolution in the vicinity of N50 with high resolution laser spectroscopy of 81−82Zn isotopes, CERN ISOLDE PROPOSAL (2020)

2020
[11]

Wraith, X

C. Wraith, X. Yang, L. Xie, C. Babcock, J. Biero´ n, J. Billowes, M. L. Bissell, K. Blaum, B. Cheal, L. Filip- pin, et al., Evolution of nuclear structure in neutron-rich odd-zn isotopes and isomers, Physics Letters B771, 385 (2017)

2017
[12]

Kell¨ o, A

V. Kell¨ o, A. J. Sadlej, and P. Pyykk¨ o, The nuclear quadrupole moment of 45Sc, Chemical Physics Letters 329, 112 (2000)

2000
[13]

Vingerhoets, K

P. Vingerhoets, K. Flanagan, M. Avgoulea, J. Billowes, M. Bissell, K. Blaum, B. Brown, B. Cheal, M. De Rydt, D. Forest, et al., Nuclear spins, magnetic moments, and quadrupole moments of Cu isotopes from N=28 to N=46: Probes for core polarization effects, Physical Review C—Nuc...

2010
[14]

De Groote, J

R. De Groote, J. Billowes, C. Binnersley, M. Bissell, T. E. Cocolios, T. Day Goodacre, G. J. Farooq-Smith, D. Fedorov, K. Flanagan, S. Franchoo, et al., Dipole and quadrupole moments of 73−78Cu as a test of the robust- ness of the Z=28 shell closure near 78Ni, Physical Review ...

2017
[15]

Reponen, R

M. Reponen, R. de Groote, L. Al Ayoubi, O. Beliuskina, M. Bissell, P. Campbell, L. Ca˜ nete, B. Cheal, K. Chrysa- lidis, C. Delafosse, et al., Evidence of a sudden increase in the nuclear size of proton-rich silver-96, Nature Com- munications12, 4596 (2021)

2021
[16]

C. H. Townes, Determination of nuclear quadrupole mo- ments, External Properties of Atomic Nuclei / ¨Aussere Eigenschaften der Atomkerne , 377 (1958)

1958
[17]

Stone, Table of nuclear magnetic dipole and electric quadrupole moments, Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Ta- bles90, 75 (2005)

N. Stone, Table of nuclear magnetic dipole and electric quadrupole moments, Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Ta- bles90, 75 (2005)

2005
[18]

N. J. Stone, Table of nuclear electric quadrupole mo- ments, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Re- ports 10.61092/iaea.a6te-dg7q (2021)

2021 doi
[19]

Pyykk¨ o, Year-2017 nuclear quadrupole moments, Molecular Physics116, 1328 (2018)

P. Pyykk¨ o, Year-2017 nuclear quadrupole moments, Molecular Physics116, 1328 (2018)

2017
[20]

Dembczy´ nski, G

J. Dembczy´ nski, G. Guthoehrlein, and E. Stachowska, Sternheimer free determination of the 59Co nuclear quadrupole moment from hyperfine-structure measure- ments, Physical Review A48, 2752 (1993)

1993
[21]

Powers, The measurement of E2 and E4 moments us- ing exotic atoms, Hyperfine Interactions4, 123 (1978)

R. Powers, The measurement of E2 and E4 moments us- ing exotic atoms, Hyperfine Interactions4, 123 (1978). 7

1978
[22]

Martorell and F

J. Martorell and F. Scheck, Spectroscopic quadrupole moments from muonic atoms: Nuclear polarizability cor- rection, Nuclear Physics A274, 413 (1976)

1976
[23]

Effenberger, W

B. Effenberger, W. Kunold, W. Oesterle, M. Schnei- der, L. Simons, R. Abela, and J. W¨ uest, Determination of the spectroscopic quadrupole moments of 75 33As and 63 29Cu, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik A Atoms and Nuclei309, 77 (1982)

1982
[24]

Weber, J

R. Weber, J. Kern, U. Kiebele, J.-A. Pinston, B. Aas, I. Beltrami, T. Bernold, K. Bongardt, T. V. Ledebur, H. Leisi, et al., Spectroscopic quadrupole moment of 27Al from muonic X-rays, Physics Letters B98, 343 (1981)

1981
[25]

Vingerhoets, K

P. Vingerhoets, K. Flanagan, J. Billowes, M. Bissell, K. Blaum, B. Cheal, M. De Rydt, D. Forest, C. Geppert, M. Honma, et al., Magnetic and quadrupole moments of neutron deficient 58–62Cu isotopes, Physics Letters B 703, 34 (2011)

2011
[26]

Lozeva, D

R. Lozeva, D. Balabanski, G. Georgiev, J.-M. Daugas, S. P´ eru, G. Audi, S. Cabaret, T. Faul, M. Ferraton, E. Fiori, et al., Quadrupole moment of the 6 − isomeric state in 66Cu: Interplay between different nuclear defor- mation driving forces, Physics Letters B694, 316 (2011)

2011
[27]

Fenta, S

A. Fenta, S. Pallada, J. Correia, M. Stachura, K. John- ston, A. Gottberg, A. M. Gerami, J. R¨ oder, H. Grawe, B. Brown, et al., The 68mCu/68Cu isotope as a new probe for hyperfine studies: The nuclear moments, Europhysics Letters115, 62002 (2016)

2016
[28]

Sikorsky, J

T. Sikorsky, J. Geist, D. Hengstler, S. Kempf, L. Gastaldo, C. Enss, C. Mokry, J. Runke, C. E. D¨ ullmann, P. Wobrauschek,et al., Measurement of the 229Th isomer energy with a magnetic microcalorimeter, Physical Review Letters125, 142503 (2020)

2020
[29]

D. Yan, J. C. Weber, T. Guruswamy, J. N. Ullom, J. W. Fowler, D. A. Bennett, S. W. Deiker, W. B. Doriese, M. A. Durkin, P. A. Fisher, J. P. Hays-Wehle, G. C. Hilton, Y. I. Joe, K. M. Morgan, D. R. Schmidt, D. S. Swetz, L. R. Vale, M. Cargnelli, J. Egger, J. Marton, T. Ponta, a...

2022
[30]

Indelicato, Mcdfgme: Multiconfiguration Dirac-Fock and General Matrix Elements Program (2025v1) (2025)

P. Indelicato, Mcdfgme: Multiconfiguration Dirac-Fock and General Matrix Elements Program (2025v1) (2025)

2025
[31]

Indelicato, QED tests with highly charged ions, Jour- nal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 52, 232001 (2019)

P. Indelicato, QED tests with highly charged ions, Jour- nal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 52, 232001 (2019)

2019
[32]

G. Baptista et al., Towards precision spectroscopy of an- tiprotonic atoms for probing strong-field qed, Proceed- ings of International Conference on Exotic Atoms and Related Topics and Conference on Low Energy Antipro- tons480, 85 (2025), publication date: 2025-01-15

2025
[33]

Okumura, T

T. Okumura, T. Azuma, D. Bennett, W. Doriese, M. Durkin, J. Fowler, J. Gard, T. Hashimoto, R. Hayakawa, Y. Ichinohe, et al., Few-electron highly charged muonic Ar atoms verified by electronicKX rays, Physical Review Letters134, 243001 (2025)

2025
[34]

Ohayon, Critical evaluation of reference charge radii and applications in mirror nuclei, Atomic Data and Nu- clear Data Tables , 101732 (2025)

B. Ohayon, Critical evaluation of reference charge radii and applications in mirror nuclei, Atomic Data and Nu- clear Data Tables , 101732 (2025)

2025
[35]

A. A. Makarov and V. I. Yudson, Spectrum of cas- cade spontaneous emission: General theory including sys- tems with close transition frequencies, Phys. Rev. A89, 053806 (2014)

2014
[36]

Michel and N

N. Michel and N. S. Oreshkina, Higher-order corrections to the dynamic hyperfine structure of muonic atoms, Physical Review A99, 042501 (2019)

2019
[37]

T. Y. Saito, S. Okada, Y. Toyama, T. Azuma, B. Goncalo, D. T. Becker, D. Bennett, W. B. Doriese, J. Fowler, J. D. Gard, et al., Application of hard x-ray and gamma-ray TES microcalorimeter at accelerator fa- cility, IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity (2025)

2025
[38]

Gerchow, S

L. Gerchow, S. Biswas, G. Janka, C. Vigo, A. Knecht, S. M. Vogiatzi, N. Ritjoho, T. Prokscha, H. Luetkens, and A. Amato, GermanIum array for non-destructive testing (GIANT) setup for muon-induced x-ray emission (MIXE) at the Paul Scherrer Institute, Review of Scientific Instru...

2023
[39]

Allison, K

J. Allison, K. Amako, J. Apostolakis, P. Arce, M. Asai, T. Aso, E. Bagli, A. Bagulya, S. Banerjee, G. Barrand, et al., Recent developments in Geant4, Nuclear instru- ments and methods in physics research section A: Accel- erators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equip-...

2016
[40]

B. L. Henke, E. M. Gullikson, and J. C. Davis, X-ray interactions: photoabsorption, scattering, transmission, and reflection atE= 50−30,000 eV, Z= 1−92, Atomic data and nuclear data tables54, 181 (1993)

1993
[41]

Suzuki, D

T. Suzuki, D. F. Measday, and J. Roalsvig, Total nuclear capture rates for negative muons, Physical Review C35, 2212 (1987)

1987
[42]

Akylas and P

V. Akylas and P. Vogel, Muonic atom cascade program, Comput. Phys. Commun.;(Netherlands)15(1978)

1978
[43]

F. J. Hartmann, T. von Egidy, R. Bergmann, M. Kleber, H. J. Pfeiffer, K. Springer, and H. Daniel, Measurement of the muonic x-ray cascade in metallic iron, Phys. Rev. Lett.37, 331 (1976)

1976
[44]

Knyazeva, K

V. Knyazeva, K. Lyashchenko, M. Zhang, D. Yu, and O. Y. Andreev, Investigation of two-photon 2s→1sde- cay in one-electron and one-muon ions, Physical Review A106, 012809 (2022)

2022
[45]

Engfer, H

R. Engfer, H. Schneuwly, J. Vuilleumier, H. Walter, and A. Zehnder, Charge-distribution parameters, isotope shifts, isomer shifts, and magnetic hyperfine constants from muonic atoms, Atomic data and nuclear data ta- bles14, 509 (1974)

1974
[46]

Unger, A

D. Unger, A. Abeln, T. E. Cocolios, O. Eizenberg, C. Enss, A. Fleischmann, L. Gastaldo, C. Godinho, M. Heines, D. Hengstler, et al., MMC array to study x-ray transitions in muonic atoms, Journal of Low Tem- perature Physics216, 344 (2024)

2024
[47]

Gehrke and J

R. Gehrke and J. Davidson, Acquisition of qualityγ-ray spectra with hpge spectrometers, Applied Radiation and Isotopes62, 479 (2005)

2005
[48]

Gotta, Precision spectroscopy of light exotic atoms, Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics52, 133 (2004)

D. Gotta, Precision spectroscopy of light exotic atoms, Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics52, 133 (2004)

2004
[49]

, G4beamline simulation program,https:// https://www.muonsinc.com/Website1/G4beamline, ac- cessed: 2025-08-28

Muons, Inc. , G4beamline simulation program,https:// https://www.muonsinc.com/Website1/G4beamline, ac- cessed: 2025-08-28

2025
[50]

Ohayon, A

B. Ohayon, A. Abeln, S. Bara, T. E. Cocolios, O. Eizenberg, A. Fleischmann, L. Gastaldo, C. God- inho, M. Heines, D. Hengstler, et al., Towards precision muonic x-ray measurements of charge radii of light nuclei, Physics6, 206 (2024)

2024
[51]

Wauters and A

F. Wauters and A. K. on behalf of the muX collaboration, The muX project, SciPost Phys. Proc. , 022 (2021). 8

2021
[52]

Unger, A

D. Unger, A. Abeln, C. Enss, A. Fleischmann, D. Hengstler, S. Kempf, and L. Gastaldo, High-resolution for IAXO: MMC-based X-ray detectors, Journal of In- strumentation16(06), P06006
[53]

Roberts, G4beamline Validation,https: //www.muonsinc.com/Website1/Muons/ G4beamlineValidation.pdf(2012), accessed: 2025- 08-28

T. Roberts, G4beamline Validation,https: //www.muonsinc.com/Website1/Muons/ G4beamlineValidation.pdf(2012), accessed: 2025- 08-28

2012
[54]

Lalanne, M

L. Lalanne, M. Athanasakis-Kaklamanakis, D. Dao, ´A. Koszor´ us, Y. Liu, R. Mancheva, F. Nowacki, J. Reilly, C. Bernerd, K. Chrysalidis, et al., 61Cr as a doorway to the N=40 island of inversion, Physical Review C112, L031301 (2025)

2025
[55]

Lalanne and ´A

L. Lalanne and ´A. Koszor´ us, Collinear resonance ioniza- tion spectroscopy of chromium isotopes betweenN= 28 andN= 40, Tech. Rep. (CERN-ISOLDE PROPOSAL,
[56]

Reilly and M

J. Reilly and M. Athanasakis-Kaklamanakis, Laser spectroscopy of neutron-rich Ni with PI-LIST, CERN ISOLDE Proposal (2024), proposal INTC-P-719

2024
[57]

Koszor´ us, M

´A. Koszor´ us, M. Block, P. Campbell, B. Cheal, R. de Groote, W. Gins, I. Moore, A. Ortiz-Cortes, A. Raggio, and J. Warbinek, High-precision measure- ments of the hyperfine structure of cobalt ions in the deep ultraviolet range, Scientific Reports13, 4783 (2023)

2023
[58]

M¨ uller, S

P. M¨ uller, S. Kaufmann, T. Miyagi, J. Billowes, M. Bis- sell, K. Blaum, B. Cheal, R. Garcia Ruiz, W. Gins, C. Gorges, H. Heylen, A. Kanellakopoulos, S. Malbrunot- Ettenauer, R. Neugart, G. Neyens, W. N¨ ortersh¨ auser, T. Ratajczyk, L. Rodr ´ ıguez, R. S´ anchez, S. Sailer, ...

2024
[60]

T. E. Cocolios and X. Yang, Probing the magicity and shell evolution in the vicinity of N=50 with high- resolution laser spectroscopy of 81−82Zn isotopes: Adden- dum: Laser-assisted decay spectroscopy of 75m,79mZn, CERN ISOLDE Proposal (2024), proposal INTC-P-579- ADD-1

2024
[2022]

(2022), proposal INTC-P-627

2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Neyens, Nuclear magnetic and quadrupole moments for nuclear structure research on exotic nuclei, Reports on Progress in Physics66, 633 (2003)

G. Neyens, Nuclear magnetic and quadrupole moments for nuclear structure research on exotic nuclei, Reports on Progress in Physics66, 633 (2003)

2003

[2] [2]

Neugart and G

R. Neugart and G. Neyens, Nuclear moments, The Eu- roschool Lectures on Physics with Exotic Beams, Vol. II (Lecture Notes in Physics, Vol. 700) , 135 (2006)

2006

[3] [3]

Despite these advantages, the potential of muonic atoms to determineQ ref has been limited by the ca- pabilities of the available measurement techniques [19]

Unlike electronic systems, the electric quadrupole cou- pling dominates over that of the magnetic dipole, as mag- netic moments scale inversely with mass, thus simplifying the analysis. Despite these advantages, the potential of muonic atoms to determineQ ref has been limited by the ca- pabilities of the available measurement techniques [19]. The transiti...

[4] [4]

Steffen, Precision measurements of nuclear quadrupole moments by muonic x rays, Hyperfine Interactions24, 223 (1985)

R. Steffen, Precision measurements of nuclear quadrupole moments by muonic x rays, Hyperfine Interactions24, 223 (1985)

1985

[5] [5]

Koszor´ us, R

´A. Koszor´ us, R. De Groote, B. Cheal, P. Campbell, and I. Moore, Nuclear structure studies by collinear laser spectroscopy, The European Physical Journal A60, 20 (2024)

2024

[6] [6]

B. H. Sun, C. Y. Liu, and H. X. Wang, Correlating double-difference of charge radii with quadrupole defor- mation and B(E2) in atomic nuclei, Physical Review C 95, 014307 (2017)

2017

[7] [7]

The corresponding calcu- lated transition intensity is≈0.15 %

Although it does not strongly overlap with the region of interest, it may significantly hinderQextraction if a conventional HPGe detector is used for such measure- ments (as shown in Figure 4). The corresponding calcu- lated transition intensity is≈0.15 %. As this transition is expected to be isolated when using an MC detector, its measured magnitude may ...

[8] [8]

Speidel, O

K.-H. Speidel, O. Kenn, and F. Nowacki, Magnetic mo- ments and nuclear structure, Progress in Particle and Nu- clear Physics49, 91 (2002)

2002