Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Concept of the UCN Source at the WWR-K Reactor (AlSUN)

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims a reactor-based ultracold-neutron source can reach stored densities near $6\times10^4$ cm$^{-3}$ by separating heat flow from neutron flow.

desk verdict A clear, honest concept paper for a superfluid-helium UCN source; the headline densities are plausible but explicitly conditional on untested heat-removal and transport assumptions. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.18131 v1 pith:OVWNWYXP submitted 2025-06-22 physics.ins-det nucl-ex

Sayabek Sakhiyev , Kylyshbek Turlybekuly , Asset Shaimerdenov , Darkhan Sairanbayev , Avganbek Sabidolda , Zhanibek , Kurmanaliyev , Akzhol Almukhametov
show 8 more authors
Olzhas Bayakhmetov Ruslan Kiryanov Ekaterina Korobkina Egor Lychagin Alexey Muzychka Valery Nesvizhevsky Cole Teander Pham Khac Tuyen
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.ins-detnucl-ex
keywords ultracoldneutronssuperfluidhelium-4neutronsourceconceptUCNaccumulationfocusingguideKapitzaresistancecryogeniccoolingthermalcolumn
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper argues that a research reactor's thermal column can host a source of ultracold neutrons (UCNs) - neutrons so slow they can be held in traps - whose density far exceeds anything built so far. The key move is to separate heat flow from UCN flow: heat leaves through a heat-conducting wall at about 1 K, while neutrons exit through a small opening into a focusing guide, so the source can accumulate UCNs without diluting them in a large guide volume. If the proposed materials and cooling perform as assumed, the source would produce about $2.6\times10^7$ UCN/s, store about $6\times10^4$ UCN/cm$^3$, and deliver about $5\times10^3$ UCN/cm$^3$ to an experiment. A sympathetic reader would care because many precision neutron experiments are statistically limited, and a two-order-of-magnitude density gain would shorten data-taking from years to months.

What carries the argument

Three mechanisms carry the argument. First, superfluid $^4$He converts cold neutrons near 8.9 Å into UCNs by single-phonon downscattering, and at low temperature it stores them because thermal excitations that would heat them up are frozen out. Second, the design decouples heat removal from UCN extraction: a rear wall about 30 cm in diameter conducts the roughly 10 W heat load into a $^3$He-pumped cryostat, while UCNs exit separately through a small hole, avoiding the density dilution that occurs when source, guide, and setup share one open volume. The limiting physical quantity is the Kapitza temperature jump across that wall: near 1 K, $\Delta T_{\rm K}=AQ/T^3$, and the design assumes $\Delta T_{\rm He}\lesssim0.2$ K at a heat flux around 140 W/m$^2$. Third, a focusing guide (widening cone, straight section, narrowing cone) redirects UCNs along the axis so they hit walls far less often, keeping exit density close to source density. The storage-time formula $1/\tau=1/\tau_{\rm He}+1/\tau_{\rm wall}+1/\tau_\beta$, with $\tau_{\rm He}\propto T^{-7}$, converts helium temperature and wall-loss coefficient $\eta$ into the predicted density.

What would settle it

Run the small cryostat test outlined in the paper: pump $^3$He to hold the heat exchanger near 0.7 K, apply about 0.1 W through a prototype heat-conducting wall, and measure the temperature difference across the helium. If that difference at a heat flux near 140 W/m$^2$ exceeds 0.2 K at about 1 K, the predicted $6\times10^4$ cm$^{-3}$ density is unreachable because the storage time collapses with temperature.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the proposed AlSUN design can accumulate ultracold neutrons in a 35-liter superfluid-$^4$He converter held below 1 K, then transport them without proportional density loss to external setups. Calculations give a production rate $P_{\rm UCN}=2.6\times10^7$ s$^{-1}$, a maximum stored density $\rho_{\rm max}=6.1\times10^4$ cm$^{-3}$ at $0.9$ K, and an experimental-setup density $\rho_{\rm exp}=4.9\times10^3$ cm$^{-3}$ after corrections for gravity, spectrum cutoffs, and a separating foil. The prediction follows from scaling the one-phonon production rate to an 8.9 Å cold-neutron flux of $1.62\times10^{10}$ cm$^{-2}$s$^{-1}$Å$^{-1}$, combined with a storage time set by helium temperature ($\tau_{\rm He}\sim T^{-7}$), wall losses, and $\beta$ decay. The paper does not claim the source is built; it claims the concept is feasible if three untested elements - heat removal through a wall, low-loss high-critical-energy coatings, and a focusing guide - meet their targets.

Load-bearing premise

Everything hinges on removing about 10 W of heat through a 30 cm wall at about 1 K with the temperature difference across the helium staying below roughly 0.2 K, because storage time falls as $T^{-7}$ if the converter warms up.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the design works, UCN density in an experimental setup reaches about $5\times10^3$ cm$^{-3}$, roughly an order of magnitude above today's best accumulated density, so lifetime, electric-dipole-moment, and symmetry tests can collect data faster.
  • Because heat and UCN flows are separated, the source can run in accumulation mode: closing the exit lets density build toward $\rho_{\rm max}$, then opening a small hole releases UCNs into the guide without diluting the stored cloud.
  • Wall coating is a high-leverage parameter: doubling the critical energy of the trap walls raises the exit flux by a factor of 7.5, so stable high-critical-energy coatings are a direct route to higher density.
  • Helium temperature is a primary performance knob: operating at 1.0 K instead of 0.9 K lowers the experimental density by about 25%, so the cryogenic system's real-world performance directly sets the physics reach.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural testable extension is to measure the exit density of a prototype focusing guide as a function of wall-loss probability; the simulation predicts a tenfold density gain over a straight guide at small loss, which could be verified on a beam before the reactor source is built.
  • The $T^{-7}$ dependence implies a strong lever: if the heat exchanger can be held below 0.9 K, stored density rises far faster than the linear production-rate scaling, so improving cryogenics may pay off more than increasing neutron flux.
  • The separation of converter and extraction channel suggests a modular layout in which the converter volume or wall coating could be upgraded without rebuilding the neutron guide; the paper does not discuss this, but it follows directly from the geometry.
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.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents the conceptual design of AlSUN, an ultracold-neutron (UCN) source based on a superfluid 4He converter placed in the thermal column of the WWR-K reactor. The key design idea is to separate the heat flow from the UCN flow: heat is removed through a heat-conducting rear wall cooled by a 3He-pumping cryostat, while UCNs are extracted through a small aperture and transported by a focusing guide. Using MCNP6 simulations for the 8.9 Å flux, a production-rate coefficient from the literature, and an assumed wall-loss factor η = 3×10^-4, the authors estimate PUCN ≈ 2.6×10^7 s^-1, a maximum source density of ρmax ≈ 6.1×10^4 cm^-3 at 0.9 K, and an experimental-setup density of ≲5×10^3 cm^-3. The paper also describes planned measurements of Kapitza-limited heat transfer through the wall, coatings with high critical energy, and focusing UCN guides.

Significance. If the design targets are achieved, AlSUN would exceed the UCN density of current sources such as superSUN by about two orders of magnitude, with corresponding benefits for neutron lifetime, electric-dipole-moment, and gravitational-level experiments. The manuscript is transparent about the status of the project: Section 2.2 explicitly states that the cooling-through-a-wall method and the focusing guides are new and untested, and Section 5 says the methods 'require additional research.' The neutron-flux calculation is benchmarked against the PNPI geometry, and Table 2 quantifies the temperature sensitivity. The main value of the paper is as a well-scoped design study with clearly identified critical-path R&D items and falsifiable performance targets, rather than as a demonstration of the quoted densities.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.1] The 0.9 K operating point that underlies Eq. (4) and the headline density of §3.2 rests on the expectation that the temperature difference across the heat-conducting wall, ΔT_He, will not exceed ~0.2 K at a heat flux of ~140 W/m2. This value is not measured, and no Kapitza-conductance estimate from the literature is given; the paper only says the authors 'expect' it and lists the measurement as a planned study. Since Table 2 gives τ_He ∝ T^-7, an additional 0.3 K drop (to 1.2 K) would reduce τ_He from 260 s to 35 s and lower ρ_max from 6.1×10^4 cm^-3 to about 2.0×10^4 cm^-3. The manuscript should either support ΔT_He with existing data for the proposed wall material and surface preparation or present the final density as a function of ΔT_He.
  2. [§3.1.1 and Table 2] The quoted maximum density is computed for a single wall-loss parameter, η = 3×10^-4, adopted from the TRIUMF/PNPI calculations. The paper itself notes that the best measured Be value is η ~ 3×10^-5 and the theoretical value is η ~ 3×10^-7, so the plausible range spans more than an order of magnitude in τ_wall. At 0.9 K, replacing η = 3×10^-4 by η = 3×10^-5 increases τ0_stor from 82 s to about 180 s and raises ρ_max by roughly a factor of 2.2, whereas η = 3×10^-3 lowers it by a factor of about 5.8. Because Eq. (4) makes the density claim proportional to τ0_stor, the paper should report the density as a sensitivity range over η rather than as a single number.
  3. [§3.1] The production estimate in Eq. (3) scales linearly with the computed 8.9 Å flux dJ/dλ = 1.62×10^10 cm^-2 s^-1 Å^-1, but the paper does not report the statistical uncertainty of the MCNP result, the sensitivity to the assumed Pb thickness and LD2 geometry, or a quantitative comparison with the PNPI calculation beyond a factor-of-two-to-three statement. Since all subsequent density predictions inherit this flux, a quantitative uncertainty or a range for dJ/dλ should accompany the headline value.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§3.1] The word 'bacause' should be 'because'.
  2. [§3.1.1] The notation ^BeR for the specific production rate is confusing; please use a clear symbol and define it explicitly in the text.
  3. [§4.3] The text states that the calculation 'ignores the UCN losses' and assumes specular reflection, while Fig. 6 plots transmission versus loss probability; please clarify how the idealized transmission and the loss-dependent transmission are combined.
  4. [Fig. 5 caption] The caption contains the phrase 'for used for calculations'; it should read 'used for the calculations.'
  5. [§3.2] The correction factors k1, k2, and k3 are given only as numerical values; a short derivation or reference for each factor would help readers assess their validity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; performance estimates are forward calculations from MCNP fluxes and published SF4He downscattering/storage physics, with untested assumptions flagged as such.

full rationale

The central estimates are produced by a forward chain, not by fitting or by definition. The 8.9 Å flux is computed with MCNP6.2 for the AlSUN geometry; the production rate uses the coefficient BeR = 4.55e-8 cm^-1 from ref. [48], a published theoretical result on SF4He downscattering that does not depend on the present design and has been used by other projects. The density estimate uses rho_max = tau_stor * R with tau_stor from the T^-7 storage-time law [48], the beta-decay lifetime, and a wall-loss eta = 3e-4 taken from TRIUMF/PNPI benchmark calculations; no parameter is fitted to the claimed 6e4 UCN/cm3 or 5e3 UCN/cm3 numbers. Although ref. [48] shares an author with this paper, it is an external, parameter-free theoretical result and therefore real evidence, not a self-citation chain. The Kapitza-resistance cooling assumption (Section 4.1) is explicitly an expectation awaiting measurement and could reduce performance if wrong, but an untested assumption is a technical risk, not circularity. No equation in the paper reduces a prediction to its own input, so no circular step is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The performance estimates rest on three unmeasured assumptions: the wall loss factor eta (=3e-4), the Kapitza-limited temperature drop across the heat-conducting wall, and the one-pass loss in the focusing guide. The production-rate coefficient and the T^-7 upscaling law come from ref [48], which shares an author with this paper.

free parameters (3)
  • UCN wall loss factor eta = 3e-4
    Chosen to match TRIUMF and PNPI calculations (Sections 2.2, 3.1); not measured for the proposed high-critical-energy coatings. Directly sets the storage time and the resulting UCN density via equations (4) and (5).
  • Expected temperature drop across heat-conducting wall DeltaT_He = <0.2 K at 140 W/m2
    Assumed in Section 4.1 based on expected Kapitza resistance; explicitly listed as to-be-measured. Determines whether the converter actually reaches ~0.9 K.
  • UCN one-pass loss in the neutron guide = 50 percent
    Assumed in Section 3.2 (there is no such sentence). Affects the experimental density estimate rho_exp. The focusing-guide calculations in Section 4.3 suggest lower losses are possible, but the 50% value is used in the central estimate.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The single-phonon UCN production rate in SF4He is given by BeR = 4.55e-8 * dJ/dlambda(8.9 A) cm-3 s-1
    Taken from ref [48], which shares an author (Korobkina) with the present paper; the coefficient is treated as external but is not re-derived here. Used in Section 3.1.1.
  • domain assumption SF4He upscattering time scales as T^-7 and the values in Table 2 hold
    From ref [48]; central to the claimed benefit of cooling below 1 K. Section 3.1, Table 2.
  • domain assumption The MCNP6 model geometry close to the PNPI project is a good first approximation to the optimal accumulation geometry
    Stated in Section 3; benchmarking against PNPI is used to validate the flux calculation, but the optimized accumulation geometry is not simulated.
  • standard math Lambert angular distribution and isotropic UCN spectrum sqrt(E) for the guide simulations
    Standard phase-space assumptions; used in Section 4.3.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Concept of the UCN Source at the WWR-K Reactor (AlSUN)." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OVWNWYXP

@misc{pith2026250618131,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Concept of the UCN Source at the WWR-K Reactor (AlSUN)},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OVWNWYXP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.18131}
}
abstract

We present the concept of the ultracold neutron (UCN) source with a superfluid helium-4 converter located in the thermal column of the WWR-K research reactor at the Institute of Nuclear Physics (INP) in Almaty, Kazakhstan. The conceptual design is based on the idea of accumulating UCNs in the source and effectively transporting them to experimental setups. We propose to improve the UCN density in the source by separating the heat and the UCN flows from the production volume and decreasing both, the temperature of the SuperFluid $ ^{ 4 }$He (SF $ ^{ 4 }$He) converter below $\sim$1 K and the coefficient of UCN wall loss below $\sim$$ 10^{ -4 }$. To achieve the operation temperatures below 1 K we plan to use a He-3 pumping cryogenic system and minimize the thermal load on the UCN accumulation trap walls. Additional gain in the total number of accumulated UCNs can be achieved due to use of a material of a high critical velocity for the walls of the accumulation trap. The implementation of such a design critically depends on the availability of materials with specific UCN and cryogenic properties. This paper describes the conceptual design of the source, discusses its implementation methods and material requirements, and plans for material testing studies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.18131 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Scheme of the WWR-K reactor, top view (left) and side view (right). 1 – reactor [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Scheme of the UCN source at the WWR-K reactor. 1 – trap with SF [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Differential neutron flux density averaged over the volume of SF [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Flux of UCNs from the source for different coatings of its walls, depending on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Geometry of the neutron guides for used for calculations. The straight neutron [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: On the left are the transmission coefficients of neutron guides depending on the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Initial results of the TRIUMF ultracold advanced neutron source

    nucl-ex 2025-09 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    The TRIUMF TUCAN ultracold neutron source detected (9.3 +/- 0.8) x 10^5 UCNs in 60 s irradiations at 37 uA, with yields rising linearly with beam current.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 55 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [48]

    Production of UCN by downscattering in superfluid He.Phys

    Korobkina, E.; Golub, R.; Wehring, B.W.; Young, A.R. Production of UCN by downscattering in superfluid He.Phys. Lett. A2002, 301, 462– 469

    work page

  2. [1]

    Ob- servation of ultracold neutrons.JETP Lett

    Lushchikov, V.I.; Pokotilovskii, Y.N.; Strelkov, A.V.; Shapiro, F.L. Ob- servation of ultracold neutrons.JETP Lett. 1969, 9, 40–45

    work page 1969

  3. [2]

    Measurements of total cross sections for very slow neutrons with velocities from 100 m/sec to 5 m/sec

    Steyerl, A. Measurements of total cross sections for very slow neutrons with velocities from 100 m/sec to 5 m/sec. Phys. Lett. B 1969, 29, 33–35

    work page 1969

  4. [3]

    Generation of ul- tracold neutrons at the stationary WWR-K reactor.At

    Akhmetov, E.Z.; Kaipov, D.K.; Konks, V.A.; Lushchikov, V.I.; Pokotilovskii, Y.N.; Strelkov, A.V.; Shapiro, F.L. Generation of ul- tracold neutrons at the stationary WWR-K reactor.At. Energy 1974, 37(1), 35–38. (In Russ.)

    work page 1974

  5. [4]

    Installation for generating and transmission measurements of ultracold neutrons at the radial channel of the WWR-K reactor

    Akhmetov, E.Z.; Kaipov, D.K.; Konks, V.A.; Kulagin, E.N.; Machnev, N.F.; Strelkov, A.V.; Tretyakov, L.I. Installation for generating and transmission measurements of ultracold neutrons at the radial channel of the WWR-K reactor. InNeutron Physics, 4th All-Union Conf., Kiev, 1977; Part I, pp. 178–181. (In Russ.)

    work page 1977

  6. [5]

    Ignatovich, V.K.The Physics of Ultracold Neutrons; Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK, 1990

    work page 1990

  7. [6]

    Golub, R.; Richardson, D.; Lamoreaux, S.Ultra-Cold Neutrons; Adam Hilger: Bristol, Philadelphia, and New York, 1991

    work page 1991

  8. [7]

    Quantum states of neutrons in the Earth’s gravitational field.Nature 2002, 415, 297-299

    Nesvizhevsky, V.V., et al. Quantum states of neutrons in the Earth’s gravitational field.Nature 2002, 415, 297-299

    work page 2002

Show all 56 references
  1. [8]

    Noncommutative gravitational quantum well.Phys

    Bertolami, O., et al. Noncommutative gravitational quantum well.Phys. Rev. D 2005, 72, 025010

    2005

  2. [9]

    Lamoreaux, S.K.; Golub, R.J. Phys. G 2009, 36, 104002. 21

    2009

  3. [10]

    Determination of the Axial-Vector Weak Coupling Constant with Ultracold Neutrons.Phys

    Liu, J.; Mendenhall, M.P.; Holley, A.T.; et al. Determination of the Axial-Vector Weak Coupling Constant with Ultracold Neutrons.Phys. Rev. Lett.2010, 105, 181803

    2010

  4. [11]

    Nesvizhevsky, V.V. et al. Neutron whispering gallery.Nature Physics. 2010, 6, 114-117

    2010

  5. [12]

    Short-range fundamental forces

    Antoniadis, I.; Baessler, S.; Büchner, M.; et al. Short-range fundamental forces. Compt. Rend. Phys.2011, 12, 755

    2011

  6. [13]

    The neutron and its role in cosmology and particle physics.Rev

    Dubbers, D.; Schmidt, M.G. The neutron and its role in cosmology and particle physics.Rev. Mod. Phys.2011, 83, 1111

    2011

  7. [14]

    New evaluation of neutron lifetime from UCN storage experiments and beam experiments

    Serebrov, A.P.; Fomin, A.K. New evaluation of neutron lifetime from UCN storage experiments and beam experiments. Phys. Proc. 2011, 17, 199-205

    2011

  8. [15]

    Pedram, P. et al. The effects of minimal length and maximal momentum on the transition rate of ultra cold neutrons in gravitational field.J. High En. Phys. 2011, 3, 093

    2011

  9. [16]

    Engel, J.; Ramsey-Musolf, M.J.; vanKolck, U.FundamentalSymmetries in the Era of the LHC.Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.2013, 71, 21

    2013

  10. [17]

    Gravity Resonance Spectroscopy Constrains Dark En- ergy and Dark Matter Scenarios.Phys

    Jenke, T., et al. Gravity Resonance Spectroscopy Constrains Dark En- ergy and Dark Matter Scenarios.Phys. Rev. Lett.2014, 112, 151105

    2014

  11. [18]

    Improved instrument for the determination of the neutron electric charge

    Siemensen, C.; Brose, D.; Bohmer, L.; Geltenbort, P.; Plonka-Spehr, C. Improved instrument for the determination of the neutron electric charge. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A2015, 778, 26

  12. [19]

    The Neutron Enigma.Scient

    Greene, G.L.; Geltenbort, P. The Neutron Enigma.Scient. Amer.2016, 314, 36-41

    2016

  13. [20]

    Abel, C. et al. Measurement of the Permanent Electric Dipole Moment of the Neutron.Phys. Rev. Lett.2020, 124, 081803

    2020

  14. [21]

    UCN Tau Collaboration, New evaluation of neutron lifetime from UCN storage experiments and beam experiments.Phys. Rev. Lett.2021, 127, 162501. 22

    2021

  15. [22]

    Precise Measurements of the Decay of Free Neutrons

    Dubbers, D.; Märkisch, B. Precise Measurements of the Decay of Free Neutrons. Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.2021, 71, 139–163

    2021

  16. [23]

    Fundamental Neutron Physics at Spallation Sources.Annu

    Fomin, N.; Fry, J.; Pattie Jr., R.W.; Greene, G.L. Fundamental Neutron Physics at Spallation Sources.Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 2022, 72, 151–176

    2022

  17. [24]

    On the electric dipole moment of the neutron and its quantum uncertainty.Ann

    Guerrero, O.; Barrón-Palos, L.; Sudarsky, D. On the electric dipole moment of the neutron and its quantum uncertainty.Ann. Phys. 2024, 469, 169761

    2024

  18. [25]

    High-Density Ultracold Neutron Source for Low-Energy Parti- cle Physics Experiments.eprint arXiv:2504.13030 2025

    Skyler Degenkolb; Estelle Chanel; Simon Baudoin; Marie-H´el‘ene Bau- rand; DouglasH.Beck; JulietteBl ´e; EricBourgeat-Lami; ZeusCastillo; Hanno Filter; Maurits van der Grinten; Tobias Jenke; Michael Jentschel; Victorien Joyet; Eddy Leli‘evre-Berna; Husain Manasawala; Thomas Ne...

    2025 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Super-thermal sources of ultra-cold neu- trons

    Golub, R.; Pendlebury, J.M. Super-thermal sources of ultra-cold neu- trons. Phys. Lett. A1975, 53, 133

  20. [27]

    Golub, R.; Jewell, C.; Ageron, P.; Mampe, W.; Heckel, B.; Kilvington, I. Z. Phys. B 1983, 51, 187

    1983

  21. [28]

    Yoshiki, H.; Sakai, K.; Ogura, M.; et al.Phys. Rev. Lett.1992, 68, 1323

    1992

  22. [29]

    Ultracold neutrons (UCN) at a Triga reactor.Nucl

    Golub, R. Ultracold neutrons (UCN) at a Triga reactor.Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res.1984, 226, 558–559

    1984

  23. [30]

    Ultra-cold neutron production with superfluid helium and spallation neutrons.Nucl

    Masuda, Y. Ultra-cold neutron production with superfluid helium and spallation neutrons.Nucl. Instrum. Methods A2000, 440, 682–684

  24. [31]

    Spallation Ultracold- Neutron Production in Superfluid Helium.Phys

    Masuda, Y.; Kitagaki, T.; Hatanaka, K.; et al. Spallation Ultracold- Neutron Production in Superfluid Helium.Phys. Rev. Lett. 2002, 89, 284801

    2002

  25. [32]

    Spallation Ultracold Neutron Source of Superfluid Helium below 1 K.Phys

    Masuda, Y.; Hatanaka, K.; Jeong, S.-C.; et al. Spallation Ultracold Neutron Source of Superfluid Helium below 1 K.Phys. Rev. Lett.2012, 108, 134801. 23

    2012

  26. [33]

    (TUCAN Collab.) First Ultracold Neutrons at TRI- UMF

    Ahmed, S.; et al. (TUCAN Collab.) First Ultracold Neutrons at TRI- UMF. Phys. Rev. C 2019, 99, 025503

    2019

  27. [34]

    Optimizing neutron moderators for a spallation driven ultracold-neutron source at TRIUMF

    Schreyer, W.; Davis, C.A.; Kawasaki, S.; et al. Optimizing neutron moderators for a spallation driven ultracold-neutron source at TRIUMF. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A2020, 959, 163525

  28. [35]

    Estimated performance of the TRIUMF ultracold neutron source and electric dipole moment apparatus

    Sidhu, S.; Schreyer, W.; Vanbergen, S.; et al. Estimated performance of the TRIUMF ultracold neutron source and electric dipole moment apparatus. EPJ Web Conf.2023, 282, 01015

    2023

  29. [36]

    Calculation of the ultracold neutron yield from a superfluid helium source in the WWR-M reactor.Tech

    Serebrov, A.P.; Fomin, A.K. Calculation of the ultracold neutron yield from a superfluid helium source in the WWR-M reactor.Tech. Phys. 2015, 60, 1238–1242

    2015

  30. [37]

    High-Density Ultracold Neutron Sources for the WWR-M and PIK Reactors.Cryst

    Serebrov, A.P.; Fomin, A.K.; Kharitonov, A.G.; et al. High-Density Ultracold Neutron Sources for the WWR-M and PIK Reactors.Cryst. Rep. 2016, 61, 144

    2016

  31. [38]

    Estimation of the ultracold neutron production by a source designed for the WWR-M reactor.Tech

    Onegin, M.S.; et al. Estimation of the ultracold neutron production by a source designed for the WWR-M reactor.Tech. Phys.2017, 62, 633– 637

    2017

  32. [39]

    A next-generation inverse- geometry spallation-driven ultracold neutron source

    Leung, K.K.H.; Muhrer, G.; Hügle, T.; et al. A next-generation inverse- geometry spallation-driven ultracold neutron source. J. Appl. Phys. 2019, 126, 224901

    2019

  33. [40]

    Compact ultracold neutron source concept for low-energy accelerator-driven neutron sources.Eur

    Shin, Y.C.; Snow, W.M.; Baxter, D.V.; et al. Compact ultracold neutron source concept for low-energy accelerator-driven neutron sources.Eur. Phys. J. Plus 2021, 136, 882

    2021

  34. [41]

    New Source for Ultracold Neutrons at the Institut Laue–Langevin.Phys

    Piegsa, F.M.; Fertl, M.; Ivanov, S.N.; et al. New Source for Ultracold Neutrons at the Institut Laue–Langevin.Phys. Rev. C 2014, 90, 7

    2014

  35. [42]

    Concept and strategy of SuperSUN: A new ultracold neutron converter.J

    Chanel, E.; Baudoin, S.; Baurand, M.-H.; et al. Concept and strategy of SuperSUN: A new ultracold neutron converter.J. Neutron Res.2022, 24, 111–121

    2022

  36. [43]

    UCN sources at external beams of thermal neu- trons

    Lychagin, E.V., et al. UCN sources at external beams of thermal neu- trons. An example of PIK reactor.Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A2016, 823, 47-55. 24

  37. [44]

    The 50th Anniversary of the WWR-K Research Reactor.Phys

    Shaimerdenov, A.A.; Nakipov, D.A.; Arinkin, F.M.; et al. The 50th Anniversary of the WWR-K Research Reactor.Phys. At. Nucl. 2018, 81, 1408–1411

    2018

  38. [45]

    Initial MCNP6 Release Overview—MCNP6 version 1.0

    Goorley, J.T.; et al. Initial MCNP6 Release Overview—MCNP6 version 1.0. LA-UR-13-22934, 2013

    2013

  39. [46]

    Neutron and gamma fields in the thermal column niche of the WWR-K reactor

    Turlybekuly, K.; Shaimerdenov, A.A.; Sairanbayev, D.S.; et al. Neutron and gamma fields in the thermal column niche of the WWR-K reactor. NNC RK Bull.2024, 3, 49–55. (In Russ.)

    2024

  40. [47]

    Cold neutron sources at ILL

    Ageron, P. Cold neutron sources at ILL. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 1989, 284, 197–199

    1989

  41. [49]

    Anomalous in- teraction of ultracold neutrons with the surface of a beryllium trap

    Alfimenkov, V.P.; Strelkov, A.V.; Shvetsov, V.N.; et al. Anomalous in- teraction of ultracold neutrons with the surface of a beryllium trap. JETP Lett. 1992, 55, 84

    1992

  42. [50]

    Mezei,The Raison d’Être of Long Pulse Spallation Sources

    F. Mezei,The Raison d’Être of Long Pulse Spallation Sources. J. Neu- tron Res.1997, 6, 3

    1997

  43. [51]

    Abele, H.; et al., Characterization of a ballistic supermirror neutron guide. Nucl. Instrum. 553 Methods A2006, 562, 407

  44. [52]

    Study of heat transfer mechanisms in helium II.Zh

    Kapitsa, P.L. Study of heat transfer mechanisms in helium II.Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.1941, 11(1), 1. (In Russ.)

    1941

  45. [53]

    PENTrack—a simula- tion tool for ultracold neutrons, protons, and electrons.Nucl

    Schreyer, W.; Kikawa, T.; Losekamm, M.J.; et al. PENTrack—a simula- tion tool for ultracold neutrons, protons, and electrons.Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 2017, 858, 123

    2017

  46. [54]

    Nesvizhevsky, V.V.Polishedsapphireforultracold-neutronguides. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A2006, 557, 576-579

  47. [55]

    Nesvizhevsky, V.V., Pignol, G., Protasov, K.V., et al.; Comparison of specularly reflecting mirrors for GRANIT. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 2007, 578, 435-438. 25

    2007

  48. [56]

    Available online:https://indico.inp.kz/event/ 3/ (accessed on 25 April 2025)

    International Workshop: UCN and VCN Source at the Institute of Nu- clear Physics, Kazakhstan and their applications, April 8–11, 2024, Al- maty, Kazakhstan. Available online:https://indico.inp.kz/event/ 3/ (accessed on 25 April 2025). 26

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.