Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 4 cited by

r-Process Nucleosynthesis With Ab Initio Nuclear Masses Around The N=82 Shell Closure

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that first-principles nuclear masses around N=82 can refine r-process abundance predictions, strengthening the second peak and shifting the third.

desk verdict First ab initio mass block in an r-process network, but the headline effect leans on S_n values at N=87 that sit outside the paper's own uncertainty estimate. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.19131 v2 pith:HF7FLXFN submitted 2025-09-23 astro-ph.HE nucl-exnucl-th

Jan Kuske , Takayuki Miyagi , Almudena Arcones , Achim Schwenk This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HEnucl-exnucl-th
keywords r-processnucleosynthesisabinitionuclearmassesVS-IMSRGN=82shellclosureneutronstarmergerswaitingpointmassuncertaintiesseparationenergy
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 claims that newly calculated ab initio masses for 70 neutron-rich nuclei near the N=82 shell closure, where experimental data are lacking, can refine r-process predictions beyond what global phenomenological mass models allow. In neutron star merger conditions, using these masses slows the nucleosynthesis flow: the second r-process peak near A=132 is strengthened, fewer nuclei are made beyond that peak, and the third peak shifts to heavier masses. The effect appears because the ab initio one-neutron separation energies are lower and pairing is enhanced beyond N=86, creating an extra waiting region. The same qualitative behavior survives when averaging over all 11,218 trajectories of a merger simulation, so the result is not an artifact of one ejecta path. If true, this shows that first-principles nuclear theory is now precise enough to help explain where half of the heavy elements come from.

What carries the argument

The central object is the valence-space in-medium similarity renormalization group (VS-IMSRG), a first-principles many-body method that computes ground-state masses from chiral nucleon-nucleon and three-nucleon interactions. The paper uses two valence-space choices (VS1 and VS2) to assign uncertainty bands to one-neutron separation energies; these masses are then glued onto a global mass model for the rest of the nuclear chart and fed into a reaction network. The separation energies are the load-bearing input because the r-process path in (n,γ)-(γ,n) equilibrium runs along nuclei of roughly constant neutron separation energy.

What would settle it

A direct mass measurement of a neutron-rich isotope with N=87 in the palladium-to-cadmium region, such as 131Pd, 132Ag, or 133Cd, that yields a one-neutron separation energy at or above the global-model value would falsify the core mechanism. An observed r-process abundance pattern from a well-characterized neutron star merger that shows no third-peak shift would also weigh against the prediction, though astrophysical conditions make that test less clean.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

For the first time, systematic ab initio mass calculations in the region just beyond the N=82 magic number are used inside r-process nucleosynthesis networks. The one-neutron separation energies from the valence-space in-medium similarity renormalization group (VS-IMSRG) are systematically lower than those of the global model, and the odd-even staggering beyond N=86 signals enhanced pairing for palladium, silver, and cadmium. These changes make N=86 nuclei act as a second waiting point: the flow accumulates there, the neutron-capture/photo-dissociation equilibrium ends later, and the delayed freeze-out leaves more neutrons for post-freeze-out captures, shifting the third r-process peak upwar

Load-bearing premise

The whole prediction rests on the accuracy of the calculated one-neutron separation energies for the 70 unmeasured nuclei, especially the low S_n at N=87 and the enhanced pairing beyond N=86; if those are artifacts of the chosen interaction or the many-body truncation, the waiting point and third-peak shift would disappear.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The second r-process peak near A=132 would be produced with 2–3 times higher final abundances in representative neutron star merger ejecta.
  • The nucleosynthesis flow accumulates at N=86, lowering abundances of nuclei between the second and third peaks.
  • The third r-process peak shifts toward larger mass numbers because more neutrons remain available after the delayed freeze-out.
  • The effect survives mass integration over a full merger simulation with 11,218 trajectories, so it is not limited to one chosen ejecta path.
  • The region beyond N=86 in palladium, silver, and cadmium becomes a concrete target for next-generation rare-isotope mass measurements.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the enhanced pairing beyond N=86 were consistently applied to beta-decay half-lives and beta-delayed neutron emission, the delayed flow could change further, either strengthening or eroding the second-peak enhancement; the paper keeps those rates from a global model and does not compute them consistently.
  • The same ab initio-plus-global replacement strategy could be applied around the N=126 shell closure, where the third peak is set; this paper's method suggests a direct way to test whether the third-peak shift is a generic consequence of refining shell-closure masses.
  • Only a few newly measured indium and tin masses currently check the calculations externally; direct measurements of N=87 cadmium or palladium masses would cleanly discriminate the claimed low separation energies from the global-model values.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript combines valence-space in-medium similarity renormalization group (VS-IMSRG) mass calculations for 70 neutron-rich isotopes around N=82 with the FRDM2012/AME2020 baseline in the WinNet r-process network. Three mass scenarios (central, min, max) are built from the VS-IMSRG separation energies, with uncertainties estimated from VS1-VS2 valence-space differences for N=83-86. Nucleosynthesis is computed for representative trajectories of a neutron-star merger, merger disk, magneto-rotational supernova, and neutron-star black-hole merger, as well as for the mass-integrated ejecta of an 11,218-trajectory NSM simulation. The central claim is that the ab initio masses, in particular low one-neutron separation energies at N=87 for Pd, Ag, and Cd, strengthen a waiting region at N=86, slow the r-process flow, enhance the A~132 peak, delay freeze-out, and shift the third r-process peak to higher mass. The new masses are validated against recent In and Sn measurements not included in AME2020.

Significance. If the central result holds, the paper demonstrates a genuinely new use of ab initio nuclear structure: refining r-process abundance predictions in a region where global mass models disagree. Strengths of the work include the use of two valence spaces and, for Sn, a second chiral interaction; validation against new experimental masses; the explicit propagation of an uncertainty band into network calculations; and the large 11,218-trajectory integrated test, which shows that the representative-trajectory effect is not an artifact of a single astrophysical condition. The paper is clear about the exploratory nature of the approach and identifies where future experimental and theoretical work is needed. However, the main physical effect rests on a small number of unmeasured separation energies, and the uncertainty estimate currently used to bracket those values is extrapolated rather than directly computed, which is the main risk to the conclusions.

major comments (3)
  1. [Methods, Eq. (1) and Fig. 1] The uncertainty band used to define the min/max scenarios is constructed from VS1-VS2 differences only for N=83-86, as stated in the text following Eq. (1). Yet the headline effect is explicitly attributed to low S_n at N=87 for Pd, Ag, and Cd (Nucleosynthesis results, Fig. 1). Since the VS2 calculation is stated to extend to N=90, the paper should either include the VS1-VS2 differences at N=87-88 in the uncertainty estimate or justify their exclusion. As written, the critical N=87 values are not bracketed by the same systematic comparison used elsewhere, and because the max scenario is nearly identical to FRDM2012, the central result depends on the lower side of an extrapolated uncertainty.
  2. [Methods and Conclusions] Beta-decay rates and beta-delayed neutron emission probabilities are taken from the FRDM-based model [12] while the masses are changed for 70 isotopes. The accumulation at N=86 is followed by beta decays with neutron emission, so the quantitative claims of a stronger second peak, slower flow, and later freeze-out depend on rates that are not consistently updated. The Conclusions acknowledge this as future work, but the manuscript does not quantify the sensitivity. A simple test, such as comparing with an alternative beta-rate prescription or artificially varying the N=86 beta-decay half-lives, would help establish whether the mass-driven effect is robust.
  3. [Fig. 1 and Nucleosynthesis results] The external validation against newly measured In and Sn masses covers those two chains, but the central effect is driven by Pd, Ag, and Cd at N=87, where no experimental anchor exists in this mass region. The paper should state this limitation explicitly and ideally perform a sensitivity study in which S_n for Pd/Ag/Cd at N=87 alone is varied within a wider range (e.g., the VS1-VS2 difference at N=87-88 if available, or a conservative ±0.5 MeV) to show how the peak enhancement and third-peak shift depend on the precise values of these specific separation energies.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Title and header] The title in the manuscript header reads 'r-process nucleosynthesis withab initionuclear masses around theN= 82shell closure'; spacing is missing in 'withab initionuclear' and 'theN= 82shell'.
  2. [Fig. 1 caption] The caption is dense and could define 'min' and 'max' more explicitly: 'min' corresponds to the smallest S_n values in the band (strongest waiting-point effect) and 'max' to the largest S_n values. This will avoid confusion when reading the text's references to the min scenario.
  3. [Reference [29]] The statement that there is a significant impact before the third peak at N=126 is supported by a private communication. A published reference or a brief quantitative statement would make this point verifiable.
  4. [Data availability] The 70 calculated VS-IMSRG masses and the resulting S_n values are central to the paper but are not provided in a table or supplementary file. A data availability statement or a table of the mass values would improve reproducibility and allow readers to test the sensitivity independently.
  5. [Conclusions] The sentence 'Future studies should target a larger set of nuclei and include the impact on beta decay half-lives and beta-delayed neutron emission probabilities consistently' is appropriate, but it could be strengthened by explaining whether the current beta-decay rates are expected to enhance or counteract the reported mass effect.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the r-process effect is a forward calculation from independent VS-IMSRG masses, not a refit or self-defined prediction.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is not circular. The VS-IMSRG masses for the 70 isotopes are computed from the chiral NN+3N 1.8/2.0(EM) interaction using a many-body method; the interaction's low-energy constants were fixed in prior nuclear-structure work, not to r-process abundances. The new masses are validated against recently measured In and Sn masses (Fig. 1, stars) that were not used in constructing the model, providing an external benchmark. The three VS-IMSRG mass scenarios are obtained by substituting these computed S_n values for FRDM2012 values for 70 nuclei; no parameter is fitted to the r-process output. The nucleosynthesis calculation then propagates these inputs through the WinNet network, with neutron-capture and photo-dissociation rates recomputed from the masses, yielding the strengthened N=86 waiting point and the third-peak shift as a forward prediction. The stated cause—'low S_n at N=87 for Pd, Ag, and Cd'—is an input property of the mass model, not an output that was fed back into the model. The uncertainty band is defined by VS1/VS2 differences (Eq. 1); whether this band adequately covers N=87 is a legitimate scientific concern about uncertainty quantification, but it is not a circular step because the prediction does not reduce to defining the band itself. Self-citations to the IMSRG method, the chiral interaction, and the merger trajectories are to established tools or external data, not to the target result. The paper's own concluding caveat that beta-decay rates are not recomputed consistently is a limitation on completeness, not circularity. Therefore no circular step exists.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No target quantity in this paper is obtained by fitting to data; the three mass scenarios are constructed from model choices, and the uncertainty band is a spread of two valence-space results, not fitted parameters. The chiral interaction's low-energy constants were fit elsewhere and are treated as inputs. The central assumptions are the accuracy of the ab initio many-body truncation, the heuristic uncertainty estimate, and the continued validity of FRDM-based beta-decay and fission inputs.

assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption Chiral NN+3N 1.8/2.0 (EM) interaction provides a sufficiently accurate Hamiltonian for heavy neutron-rich nuclei.
    Used for all VS-IMSRG mass calculations; low-energy constants fixed to other data, so this is an external input.
  • domain assumption VS-IMSRG with normal-ordered two-body approximation accurately gives ground-state and separation energies.
    The two-body truncation is estimated to induce about 1 percent correlation-energy error; this is cited from [50].
  • ad hoc to paper The valence-space difference between VS1 and VS2 is a valid uncertainty estimate for S_n.
    Eq. (1) defines Delta-S_n using maximum differences; this is a heuristic, not a statistical error.
  • domain assumption FRDM2012 masses are reliable for nuclei outside the 70-isotope region and for the transition baseline.
    The hybrid model falls back to FRDM2012 beyond the calculated range; any systematic error there propagates to reaction rates.
  • domain assumption Beta-decay rates, fission rates, and charged-particle rates from FRDM-based compilations remain valid when masses are replaced.
    Beta decays are taken from [12] rather than recomputed with VS-IMSRG masses; paper lists this as future work.
  • domain assumption Astrophysical trajectories from published merger, disk, supernova, and NSBH simulations are representative of r-process conditions.
    Used as input conditions; the paper does integrated NSM ejecta to mitigate single-trajectory bias.
  • domain assumption The N=82 to N=90 mass region is crossed by the r-process path in the NSM and NSM-DISK trajectories used.
    The mass replacement only matters if the nucleosynthesis flow passes through the computed isotopes; the paper argues this is true for the relevant trajectories.
  • domain assumption TALYS neutron-capture rates and detailed balance photo-dissociation rates correctly translate mass changes into reaction rates.
    Standard modeling; not independently validated for these exotic nuclei.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of r-Process Nucleosynthesis With Ab Initio Nuclear Masses Around The N=82 Shell Closure." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HF7FLXFN

@misc{pith2026250919131,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: r-Process Nucleosynthesis With Ab Initio Nuclear Masses Around The N=82 Shell Closure},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HF7FLXFN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.19131}
}
read the original abstract

Our understanding of the origin of heavy elements beyond iron relies on the rapid neutron capture process (r-process), which accounts for roughly half of their cosmic abundance. However, the extreme neutron-rich conditions required for the r-process involve many nuclei that remain experimentally inaccessible, making theoretical predictions essential. We explore the impact of nuclear masses calculated with the ab initio valence-space in-medium similarity renormalization group, focusing on the region around the N = 82 shell closure. We show for the first time that such ab initio mass calculations can be used to refine r-process predictions compared to global, but more phenomenological mass models. With the ab initio masses, the waiting point of the second r-process peak is strengthened, which leads to an overall slower nucleosynthesis flow, lower abundances of nuclei beyond the peak, and a stronger shift of the third r-process peak.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.19131 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. One-neutron separation energies [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Final abundances for representative trajectories of a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Averaged timescales for neutron capture ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Top panel: Integrated abundances of 11,218 mass [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. High-order perturbative calculations of nuclear ground states: Automated evaluation of many-body diagrams

    nucl-th 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    Automated MBPT up to fifth order shows convergence trends in ground-state energies of closed-shell nuclei and decomposes fourth-order terms while comparing to IMSRG.

  2. High-order perturbative calculations of nuclear ground states: Automated evaluation of many-body diagrams

    nucl-th 2026-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Automated MBPT through fifth order yields converging ground-state energies for closed-shell nuclei up to 78Ni and exposes missing triples/quadruples in IMSRG(2).

  3. Constraining Hamiltonians from chiral effective field theory with neutron-star data

    nucl-th 2026-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Neutron-star data, run through fast emulators, directly constrain the six two-nucleon low-energy constants of an N2LO chiral Hamiltonian, with future detectors able to strongly pin down the 3P1 channel.

  4. Computational schemes for the Magnus expansion of the in-medium similarity renormalization group

    nucl-th 2026-01 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    The hunter-gatherer scheme for the Magnus expansion in IMSRG(3) approximations introduces differences of up to 7 MeV in ground-state energies and 0.5 MeV in excitation energies compared to standard IMSRG(2) methods.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [12]

    M¨ oller, M

    P. M¨ oller, M. R. Mumpower, T. Kawano, and W. D. My- ers, Nuclear properties for astrophysical and radioactive- ion-beam applications (II), Atom. Data Nucl. Data Tabl. 125, 1 (2019)

    2019

  2. [1]

    Arnould, S

    M. Arnould, S. Goriely, and K. Takahashi, Ther- process of stellar nucleosynthesis: Astrophysics and nu- clear physics achievements and mysteries, Phys. Rept. 450, 97 (2007)

    2007

  3. [2]

    J. J. Cowan, C. Sneden, J. E. Lawler, A. Aprahamian, M. Wiescher, K. Langanke, G. Mart ´ ınez-Pinedo, and F.- K. Thielemann, Origin of the heaviest elements: The rapid neutron-capture process, Rev. Mod. Phys.93, 15002 (2021)

    2021

  4. [3]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration), GW170817: Observation of gravi- tational waves from a binary neutron star inspiral, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 161101 (2017)

    2017

  5. [4]

    M. R. Drout, A. L. Piro, B. J. Shappee, C. D. Kilpatrick, J. D. Simon, C. Contreras, D. A. Coulter, R. J. Foley, M. R. Siebert, N. Morrell,et al., Light curves of the neu- tron star merger GW170817/SSS17a: Implications for r-process nucleosynthesis, Science358, 1570 (2017)

    2017

  6. [5]

    C. D. Kilpatrick, R. J. Foley, D. Kasen, A. Murguia- Berthier, E. Ramirez-Ruiz, D. A. Coulter, M. R. Drout, A. L. Piro, B. J. Shappee, K. Boutsia,et al., Electro- magnetic evidence that SSS17a is the result of a binary neutron star merger, Science358, 1583 (2017)

    2017

  7. [6]

    Kratz, J.-P

    K.-L. Kratz, J.-P. Bitouzet, F.-K. Thielemann, P. Moeller, and B. Pfeiffer, Isotopicr-process abundances and nuclear structure far from stability: Implications for ther-process mechanism, Astrophys. J.403, 216 (1993)

    1993

  8. [7]

    K. L. Kratz, B. Pfeiffer, and F. K. Thielemann, Nuclear- structure input tor-process calculations, Nucl. Phys. A 630, 352 (1998)

    1998

Show all 63 references
  1. [8]

    Arcones and G

    A. Arcones and G. Martinez-Pinedo, Dynamicalr- process studies within the neutrino-driven wind scenario and its sensitivity to the nuclear physics input, Phys. Rev. C83, 045809 (2011)

    2011

  2. [9]

    M. R. Mumpower, R. Surman, D.-L. Fang, M. Beard, P. M¨ oller, T. Kawano, and A. Aprahamian, Impact of individual nuclear masses onr-process abundances, Phys. Rev. C92, 035807 (2015)

    2015

  3. [10]

    Martin, A

    D. Martin, A. Arcones, W. Nazarewicz, and E. Olsen, Impact of nuclear mass uncertainties on ther-process, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 121101 (2016)

    2016

  4. [11]

    Vassh, G

    N. Vassh, G. C. McLaughlin, M. R. Mumpower, and R. Surman, Markov Chain Monte Carlo predictions of neutron-rich lanthanide properties as a probe ofr-process dynamics, Astrophys. J.907, 98 (2021)

    2021

  5. [13]

    Baruah, G

    S. Baruah, G. Audi, K. Blaum, M. Dworschak, S. George, C. Gu´ enaut, U. Hager, F. Herfurth, A. Herlert, A. Keller- bauer,et al., Mass measurements beyond the majorr- process waiting point 80Zn, Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 262501 (2008)

    2008

  6. [14]

    Orford, N

    R. Orford, N. Vassh, J. A. Clark, G. C. McLaughlin, M. R. Mumpower, G. Savard, R. Surman, A. Apra- hamian, F. Buchinger, M. T. Burkey,et al., Preci- sion mass measurements of neutron-rich neodymium and samarium isotopes and their role in understanding rare- earth peak formatio...

    2018

  7. [15]

    Vilen, J

    M. Vilen, J. M. Kelly, A. Kankainen, M. Brodeur, A. Aprahamian, L. Canete, R. P. de Groote, A. de Roubin, T. Eronen, A. Jokinen,et al., Exploring the mass surface near the rare-earth abundance peak via precision mass measurements at JYFLTRAP, Phys. Rev. C101, 034312 (2020)

    2020

  8. [16]

    H. F. Li, S. Naimi, T. M. Sprouse, M. R. Mumpower, Y. Abe, Y. Yamaguchi, D. Nagae, F. Suzaki, M. Waka- sugi, H. Arakawa,et al., First application of mass mea- surements with the Rare-RI Ring reveals the solarr- process abundance trend atA= 122 andA= 123, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 1...

    2022

  9. [17]

    X. Zhou, M. Wang, Y. H. Zhang, Y. A. Litvinov, Z. Meisel, K. Blaum, X. H. Zhou, S. Q. Hou, K. A. Li, H. S. Xu,et al., Mass measurements show slowdown of rapid proton capture process at waiting-point nucleus 64Ge, Nature Phys.19, 1091 (2023)

    2023

  10. [18]

    B. Hu, W. Jiang, T. Miyagi, Z. Sun, A. Ekstr¨ om, C. Forss´ en, G. Hagen, J. D. Holt, T. Papenbrock, S. R. Stroberg, and I. Vernon, Ab initio predictions link the neutron skin of 208Pb to nuclear forces, Nature Phys.18, 1196 (2022)

    2022

  11. [19]

    Miyagi, X

    T. Miyagi, X. Cao, R. Seutin, S. Bacca, R. F. G. Ruiz, K. Hebeler, J. D. Holt, and A. Schwenk, Impact of two- body currents on magnetic dipole moments of nuclei, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 232503 (2024)

    2024

  12. [20]

    Door, C.-H

    M. Door, C.-H. Yeh, M. Heinz, F. Kirk, C. Lyu, T. Miyagi, J. C. Berengut, J. Biero´ n, K. Blaum, L. S. Dreissen,et al., Probing new bosons and nuclear struc- ture with ytterbium isotope shifts, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 063002 (2025)

    2025

  13. [21]

    Tsukiyama, S

    K. Tsukiyama, S. K. Bogner, and A. Schwenk, In- Medium Similarity Renormalization Group for Nuclei, Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 222502 (2011). 6

    2011

  14. [22]

    Hergert, S

    H. Hergert, S. K. Bogner, T. D. Morris, A. Schwenk, and K. Tsukiyama, The In-Medium Similarity Renormaliza- tion Group: A Novel Ab Initio Method for Nuclei, Phys. Rept.621, 165 (2016)

    2016

  15. [23]

    S. R. Stroberg, A. Calci, H. Hergert, J. D. Holt, S. K. Bogner, R. Roth, and A. Schwenk, Nucleus-dependent valence-space approach to nuclear structure, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 032502 (2017)

    2017

  16. [24]

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

    2019

  17. [25]

    Manea, J

    V. Manea, J. Karthein, D. Atanasov, M. Bender, K. Blaum, T. E. Cocolios, S. Eliseev, A. Herlert, J. D. Holt, W. J. Huang,et al., First glimpse of theN= 82 shell closure belowZ= 50 from masses of neutron-rich cadmium isotopes and isomers, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 092502 (2020)

    2020

  18. [26]

    Mollaebrahimi, C

    A. Mollaebrahimi, C. Walls, T. Dickel, T. Miyagi, A. Sieverding, C. Andreoiu, J. Ash, B. Ashrafkhani, I. Belosevic, J. Bergman,et al., Precision mass measure- ments reveal low neutron pairing in tin beyondN= 82 and its impact on stellar nucleosynthesis, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 23...

    2025

  19. [27]

    Kratz, B

    K.-L. Kratz, B. Pfeiffer, O. Arndt, S. Hennrich, and A. W¨ ohr,r-process isotopes in the 132Sn region, Eur. Phys. J. A25, 633 (2005)

    2005

  20. [28]

    Mumpower, R

    M. Mumpower, R. Surman, D. L. Fang, M. Beard, and A. Aprahamian, The impact of uncertain nuclear masses near closed shells on ther-process abundance pattern, J. Phys. G42, 034027 (2015)

    2015

  21. [29]

    Vassh and J

    N. Vassh and J. D. Holt, Private communication

  22. [30]

    Arcones and G

    A. Arcones and G. F. Bertsch, Nuclear correlations and ther-process, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 151101 (2012)

    2012

  23. [31]

    Mumpower, R

    M. Mumpower, R. Surman, G. McLaughlin, and A. Apra- hamian, The impact of individual nuclear properties on r-process nucleosynthesis, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.86, 86 (2016)

    2016

  24. [32]

    Martinet and S

    S. Martinet and S. Goriely, The impact of mass un- certainties onr-process nucleosynthesis in neutron star mergers, Astron. Astrophys.694, A180 (2025)

    2025

  25. [33]

    Reichert, C

    M. Reichert, C. Winteler, O. Korobkin, A. Arcones, J. Bliss, M. Eichler, U. Frischknecht, C. Fr¨ ohlich, R. Hirschi, M. Jacobi,et al., The Nuclear Reaction Net- work WinNet, Astrophys. J. Suppl.268, 66 (2023)

    2023

  26. [34]

    Koning, S

    A. Koning, S. Hilaire, and S. Goriely, TALYS: Modeling of nuclear reactions, Eur. Phys. J. A59, 131 (2023)

    2023

  27. [35]

    R. H. Cyburt, A. M. Amthor, R. Ferguson, Z. Meisel, K. Smith, S. Warren, A. Heger, R. D. Hoffman, T. Rauscher, A. Sakharuk,et al., The JINA REACLIB database: Its recent updates and impact on Type-I X-ray bursts, Astrophys. J. Suppl.189, 240 (2010)

    2010

  28. [36]

    Panov, E

    I. Panov, E. Kolbe, B. Pfeiffer, T. Rauscher, K.-L. Kratz, and F.-K. Thielemann, Calculations of fission rates forr- process nucleosynthesis, Nucl. Phys. A747, 633 (2005)

    2005

  29. [37]

    I. V. Panov, I. Y. Korneev, T. Rauscher, G. Mart ´ ınez- Pinedo, A. Keli´ c-Heil, N. T. Zinner, and F.-K. Thiele- mann, Neutron-induced astrophysical reaction rates for translead nuclei, Astron. & Astrophys.513, A61 (2010)

    2010

  30. [38]

    M¨ oller, A

    P. M¨ oller, A. J. Sierk, T. Ichikawa, A. Iwamoto, and M. Mumpower, Fission barriers at the end of the chart of the nuclides, Phys. Rev. C91, 024310 (2015)

    2015

  31. [39]

    Khuyagbaatar, Spontaneous fission half-lives of the heaviest nuclei: Semi-empirical predictions, Nucl

    J. Khuyagbaatar, Spontaneous fission half-lives of the heaviest nuclei: Semi-empirical predictions, Nucl. Phys. A1002, 121958 (2020)

    2020

  32. [40]

    M¨ oller, A

    P. M¨ oller, A. J. Sierk, T. Ichikawa, and H. Sagawa, Nuclear ground-state masses and deformations: FRDM(2012), Atom. Data Nucl. Data Tabl.109– 110, 1 (2017)

    2012

  33. [41]

    W. J. Huang, M. Wang, F. G. Kondev, G. Audi, and S. Naimi, The AME 2020 atomic mass evaluation (I). Evaluation of input data, and adjustment procedures, Chin. Phys. C45, 030002 (2021)

    2020

  34. [42]

    M. Wang, W. Huang, F. Kondev, G. Audi, and S. Naimi, The AME 2020 atomic mass evaluation (II). Tables, graphs and references, Chin. Phys. C45, 030003 (2021)

    2020

  35. [43]

    C. Izzo, J. Bergmann, K. A. Dietrich, E. Dunling, D. Fusco, A. Jacobs, B. Kootte, G. Kripk´ o-Koncz, Y. Lan, E. Leistenschneider,et al., Mass measurements of neutron-rich indium isotopes forr-process studies, Phys. Rev. C103, 025811 (2021)

    2021

  36. [44]

    Simonis, S

    J. Simonis, S. R. Stroberg, K. Hebeler, J. D. Holt, and A. Schwenk, Saturation with chiral interactions and con- sequences for finite nuclei, Phys. Rev. C96, 014303 (2017)

    2017

  37. [45]

    S. R. Stroberg, J. D. Holt, A. Schwenk, and J. Simonis, Ab initio limits of atomic nuclei, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 022501 (2021)

    2021

  38. [46]

    Miyagi, S

    T. Miyagi, S. R. Stroberg, P. Navr´ atil, K. Hebeler, and J. D. Holt, Converged ab initio calculations of heavy nu- clei, Phys. Rev. C105, 014302 (2022)

    2022

  39. [47]

    S. R. Stroberg, https://github.com/ragnarstroberg/imsrg

  40. [48]

    Heinz, A

    M. Heinz, A. Tichai, J. Hoppe, K. Hebeler, and A. Schwenk, In-medium similarity renormalization group with three-body operators, Phys. Rev. C103, 044318 (2021)

    2021

  41. [49]

    S. R. Stroberg, T. D. Morris, and B. C. He, In-medium similarity renormalization group with flowing 3-body op- erators, and approximations thereof, Phys. Rev. C110, 044316 (2024)

    2024

  42. [50]

    Heinz, T

    M. Heinz, T. Miyagi, S. R. Stroberg, A. Tichai, K. Hebeler, and A. Schwenk, Improved structure of cal- cium isotopes from ab initio calculations, Phys. Rev. C 111, 034311 (2025)

    2025

  43. [51]

    Shimizu, T

    N. Shimizu, T. Mizusaki, Y. Utsuno, and Y. Tsunoda, Thick-restart block Lanczos method for large-scale shell- model calculations, Comput. Phys. Commun.244, 372 (2019)

    2019

  44. [52]

    W. G. Jiang, A. Ekstr¨ om, C. Forss´ en, G. Hagen, G. R. Jansen, and T. Papenbrock, Accurate bulk properties of nuclei fromA= 2 to∞from potentials with ∆ isobars, Phys. Rev. C102, 054301 (2020)

    2020

  45. [53]

    Jacobi, F

    M. Jacobi, F. M. Guercilena, S. Huth, G. Ricigliano, A. Arcones, and A. Schwenk, Effects of nuclear matter properties in neutron star mergers, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.527, 8812 (2023)

    2023

  46. [54]

    Ricigliano, M

    G. Ricigliano, M. Jacobi, and A. Arcones, Impact of nu- clear matter properties on the nucleosynthesis and the kilonova from binary neutron star merger ejecta, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.533, 2096 (2024)

  47. [55]

    Fern´ andez and B

    R. Fern´ andez and B. D. Metzger, Delayed outflows from black hole accretion tori following neutron star binary coalescence, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.435, 502 (2013)

    2013

  48. [56]

    M.-R. Wu, R. Fern´ andez, G. Mart ´ ınez-Pinedo, and B. D. Metzger, Production of the entire range ofr-process nu- clides by black hole accretion disc outflows from neu- tron star mergers, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.463, 2323 (2016). 7

    2016

  49. [57]

    Obergaulinger and M

    M. Obergaulinger and M. ´A. Aloy, Protomagnetar and black hole formation in high-mass stars, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.469, L43 (2017)

    2017

  50. [58]

    Reichert, M

    M. Reichert, M. Obergaulinger, M. ´A. Aloy, M. Gabler, A. Arcones, and F. K. Thielemann, Magnetorotational supernovae: A nucleosynthetic analysis of sophisticated 3D models, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.518, 1557 (2022)

    2022

  51. [59]

    Korobkin, S

    O. Korobkin, S. Rosswog, A. Arcones, and C. Win- teler, On the astrophysical robustness of the neutron star mergerr-process, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.426, 1940 (2012)

    1940

  52. [60]

    Rosswog, T

    S. Rosswog, T. Piran, and E. Nakar, The multimessenger picture of compact object encounters: Binary mergers versus dynamical collisions, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 430, 2585 (2013)

    2013

  53. [61]

    Piran, E

    T. Piran, E. Nakar, and S. Rosswog, The electromagnetic signals of compact binary mergers, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.430, 2121 (2013)

    2013

  54. [62]

    Sneden, J

    C. Sneden, J. J. Cowan, and R. Gallino, Neutron-Capture Elements in the Early Galaxy, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astro- phys.46, 241 (2008)

    2008

  55. [63]

    Z. Li, T. Miyagi, and A. Schwenk, Ab initio calculations of beta-decay half-lives forN= 50 neutron-rich nuclei (2025), arXiv:2509.06812 [nucl-th]

    2025 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.