Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 56 references

Large Amplitude Collective Motion and Dissipation in the Ground State and the First Isomeric Wells in the Neutron-Induced Fission of $^{235}$U

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · 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 that 236U formed by neutron capture dissipates its collective energy to ~0.1 MeV in both pre-saddle wells, and that in the isomeric well the octupole moment oscillates with a 960 fm/c period, generating persistent mass…

desk verdict First microscopic look at pre-saddle fission well dynamics, with a notable harmonic octupole oscillation in the isomer well; the axial-symmetry restriction is the main thing to test before the claims become robust. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.08875 v1 pith:VGG3XIGN submitted 2026-08-09 nucl-th

Ibrahim Abdurrahman , Matthew Kafker , Aurel Bulgac , Ionel Stetcu This is my paper · ORCID
classification nucl-th
keywords time-dependentdensityfunctionaltheorynuclearfissioncompoundnucleuscollectivedissipationisomericwelloctupoleoscillationmassasymmetry235Uneutron-induced
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 uses time-dependent density functional theory to follow the compound nucleus 236U during the two earliest stages of neutron-induced fission: the ground-state well and the first isomeric well, which together dominate the pre-saddle lifetime. It claims that collective motion in both wells is strongly dissipative, with the collective flow energy dropping from below 0.5 MeV to about 0.1 MeV, so the freshly formed system thermalizes quickly and loses memory of its initial deformation. It also claims a qualitative difference between the wells: in the isomeric well, if the initial octupole moment exceeds a threshold, it oscillates harmonically with period 960±70 fm/c, generating a mass asymmetry that persists; in the ground-state well the octupole signal is chaotic. If correct, this is the first microscopic demonstration that dissipation precedes the outer fission barrier and that mass asymmetry can be born before the saddle. The result would connect microscopic dynamics to the compound-nucleus picture and give an experimental handle via the ratio of asymmetric to symmetric fission yields.

What carries the argument

The machinery is time-dependent superfluid density functional theory (TDDFT), evolving a single generalized Slater determinant in a $30^{2}$×60 fm³ box, restricted to axially symmetric shapes. The key observables are the quadrupole moment Q20 and octupole moment Q30 (defined as spatial moments of the total nucleon density), the collective flow energy E_flow = Σ_{q=n,p} ∫ d³r ħ² j_q²/(2m), and σ₁(t) = Σ_k |n_k(t) − n_k(0)|, which tracks the redistribution of single-particle occupation numbers. These tools let the authors see whether the cold initial deformation, a quantum mean-field state formed when a low-energy neutron is absorbed, is quickly forgotten or develops persistent collective patterns.

What would settle it

Evolve the same isomeric-well initial configurations with a triaxial TDDFT solver that allows all three deformation degrees of freedom; if the octupole moment no longer oscillates with period 960±70 fm/c beyond the critical initial value, or the flow-energy decay rate changes by more than about a factor of two, the paper's central picture fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the two pre-saddle wells are not quiet waiting rooms: in both the ground-state and first-isomeric wells of 236U, the collective flow energy—initially below 500 keV—decays to about 100 keV on a timescale of a few thousand fm/c, showing that the mean-field dynamics dissipates the energy of the collective motion. At the same time, the quadrupole moment Q20 relaxes to a common central value in each well, and the single-particle occupation numbers keep redistributing approximately linearly in time, a non-Markovian signature. The notable result is in the isomeric well: when the initial octupole moment Q30 is large enough, it oscillates with a large amplitude and period T = 960 ± 70 fm/c, i.e., mass asymmetry is generated, persists, and behaves almost harmonically; below a critical value of Q30, the motion is instead mostly chaotic. The paper interprets this as evidence that the compound nucleus thermalizes during the early stages, that tunneling through the barriers would be hindered by dissipation, and that the ratio of asymmetric to symmetric fission yields can probe the Q30 fluctuations in the isomeric well.

Load-bearing premise

The entire study assumes axially symmetric nuclear shapes, even though the paper itself notes that triaxiality is expected to matter near the first fission barrier, so the reported dissipation rates and the isomeric-well octupole oscillations could change materially when triaxial shapes are allowed.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The compound-nucleus picture acquires microscopic support: the freshly formed 236U loses its initial deformation and thermalizes in both pre-saddle wells.
  • Dissipation in the wells implies that quantum tunneling through the fission barriers is hindered, lengthening the pre-saddle lifetime and making spontaneous fission slower.
  • The ratio of asymmetric to symmetric fission yields becomes a possible experimental probe of octupole fluctuations in the isomeric well, a stage that is otherwise inaccessible to direct measurement.
  • The roughly linear growth of the occupation-redistribution measure σ₁(t) in both wells extends the non-Markovian, dissipative character of fission from saddle-to-scission back to the earliest stages.
  • Low-probability neutron emission from the ground-state and isomeric wells contributes a pre-scission neutron component, though the paper estimates the numbers are conservative.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A triaxial TDDFT calculation in the isomeric well is the natural next test: if the ~960 fm/c octupole oscillation disappears when non-axial shapes are allowed, the harmonic persistence would be a consequence of the axial restriction rather than a robust property of 236U.
  • The predicted threshold in Q30 implies that the ratio of asymmetric to symmetric fission yields should depend on how the system enters the isomeric well, for instance on the excitation energy of the compound nucleus; existing yield systematics could be examined for such a correlation.
  • The pre-saddle neutron emission seen in the wells could be included in statistical models of fission as an additional pre-scission neutron source, affecting predicted neutron multiplicities.
  • The fast thermalization time suggests that entrance-channel memory is lost long before the outer saddle, strengthening the statistical treatment of fission fragment distributions but also predicting that detailed entrance-channel effects are washed out early.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper applies time-dependent density functional theory (TDDFT) with superfluid local density approximation to simulate the dynamics of 236U inside the ground-state and first isomeric wells of the potential energy surface, as a first step toward a microscopic description of the pre-saddle, compound-nucleus stage of neutron-induced fission. Ten trajectories are prepared at various deformations (three in the ground-state well, eight in the isomeric well), with initial conditions marked in Fig. 1. The key reported results are: (i) the collective flow energy, defined in the caption of Fig. 2, decays rapidly from about 0.5 MeV to about 0.1 MeV in both wells, which the authors interpret as strong dissipation and thermalization; (ii) the quadrupole moment Q20 quickly relaxes to a well-specific central value and then shows seemingly chaotic fluctuations; (iii) in the isomeric well, trajectories with a sufficiently large initial octupole moment Q30 undergo large-amplitude, almost harmonic oscillations with period T = 960 ± 70 fm/c, while ground-state-well trajectories show only chaotic Q30 fluctuations; and (iv) a small number of neutrons are emitted in both wells, with a transient burst followed by roughly linear emission. The authors propose that the ratio of asymmetric to symmetric fission serves as an experimental probe of the strength of Q30 fluctuations in the isomeric well.

Significance. If the central results hold, this is a useful first microscopic exploration of a stage of fission that has so far been treated only through schematic or statistical models. The reported dissipation timescale and the persistent, large-amplitude Q30 oscillation in the isomeric well would provide concrete benchmarks for more complete theories and suggest a measurable observable (the asymmetric/symmetric fission ratio) tied to pre-saddle dynamics. The study uses no fitted parameters to produce the central observations: the flow-energy decay and the Q30 oscillations are direct outputs of the TDDFT equations of motion, which is a strength. The paper also connects its findings to earlier saddle-to-scission calculations, giving a coherent picture of dissipative, non-Markovian dynamics throughout the fission process. However, the significance is tempered by the acknowledged axial-symmetry restriction, the small number of trajectories, and the qualitative basis of the 'harmonic' and 'critical threshold' claims. These issues currently limit the strength of the conclusions beyond a proof-of-principle demonstration.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 2, near Fig. 1] The manuscript explicitly states, after Fig. 1, that the investigation is restricted to axially symmetric shapes although triaxiality is known to play an important role in the region surrounding the first barrier [52,53]. Two of the eight isomeric-well trajectories start near that barrier (the dashed-dotted red lines in Fig. 3). Since the central claims of this work concern the dissipation rate, the stability of the isomeric-well trajectories, and the period and persistence of the Q30 oscillations, the omission of triaxial degrees of freedom is load-bearing. In a full triaxial TDDFT treatment, the Q30 mode can couple to gamma-type quadrupole vibrations and additional single-particle channels, which could damp the oscillation, shift its period, or change the critical threshold. The authors should either include triaxial dynamics for at least a representative subset of trajectories or provide a quantitative argument, based on e.g. static triaxial PES curvature or coupling matrix elements, that the axial restriction does not materially alter the reported period or the dissipative decay of E_flow. As it stands, the paper's own caveat undermines the robustness of the main claims.
  2. [Section 3, Fig. 3(b) and surrounding text] The claim that Q30 oscillates 'in almost harmonic motion' with period T = 960 ± 70 fm/c is based on visual inspection of Fig. 3(b), and the 'critical value' of the initial Q30 separating oscillatory from chaotic behavior is never defined quantitatively. This is a central result because the proposed experimental probe (the asymmetric/symmetric fission ratio as a measure of Q30 fluctuations) depends on the persistence and regularity of this oscillation. The authors should provide a quantitative characterization, for example by computing an autocorrelation function, a power spectrum, or by fitting the time series to a damped harmonic oscillator with extracted frequency, amplitude, and damping time. They should also state how the period and its uncertainty were obtained (e.g., number of zero crossings, number of trajectories used), and define the critical initial Q30 value with an uncertainty or a range. Without this, the distinction between 'harmonic' and 'chaotic' remains subjective and cannot be independently verified.
  3. [Section 3, Fig. 2 and surrounding text] The interpretation of the decay of E_flow as 'strong dissipation' and 'rapid thermalization' needs a more careful statement of what is meant by dissipation in a unitary mean-field evolution. Equation defining E_flow (Fig. 2 caption) measures collective flow kinetic energy, and its decay reflects dephasing and Landau damping within the single-determinant TDDFT, not true entropy production or approach to a thermal ensemble as in the compound-nucleus picture. The paper does note the mean-field limitation and cites non-Markovian behavior, but the abstract and summary state that the system 'thermalizes.' I recommend either softening the language or adding a direct comparison to the single-particle occupation redistribution σ_1(t) (Fig. 4) to make explicit that the dissipation is a mean-field effect and to estimate what fraction of the initial flow energy is transferred to single-particle degrees of freedom. This is particularly important because the paper simultaneously argues that Bohr's compound-nucleus hypothesis requires beyond-mean-field complexity; the reader should not infer that the TDDFT trajectories themselves thermalize in the statistical-mechanical sense.
  4. [Section 3, Figs. 3 and 4] The quantitative support for the central claims is thin: only three trajectories in the ground-state well and eight in the isomeric well, with the period quoted as 960 ± 70 fm/c. No error bars are shown on the E_flow curves in Fig. 2 beyond a single shaded standard-deviation band, and the statement that trajectories 'become indistinguishable, at least visually' is not backed by a quantitative metric (e.g., a distance in Q20-Q30 space or a correlation measure). Given that the phenomenon of large-amplitude octupole oscillations rests on a small number of trajectories, the paper would be substantially strengthened by reporting, for each trajectory, the fitted oscillation parameters (period, amplitude, damping time) and a measure of the variance across trajectories. If the spread is too large to allow a robust period extraction, that should be stated explicitly. This is not a request for excessive statistics, but for the minimum quantitative detail needed to evaluate the strength of the claimed effect.
minor comments (5)
  1. [References] Reference [8] contains a typo: 'xparimental' should be 'experimental'. Reference [32] contains 'dimentions' in the title; it should be 'dimensions'.
  2. [Throughout] There are several grammatical and typographical slips, including 'it's' used as a possessive pronoun (e.g., 'it's magnitude', 'it's evolution') and inconsistent comma use. A careful proofread is recommended.
  3. [Section 2, Eq. (3)] The definitions of Q20 and Q30 are given without factors that are often used to make them dimensionless; this is fine, but the unit labels in Fig. 1 ('b' and 'b^(3/2)') should be introduced in the text or figure caption for clarity.
  4. [Section 2, Fig. 1 caption] The caption states 'The color bar denotes the difference in energy of a point on the PES and the ground state,' but in the printed figure the color bar is not visible or legible in panels (a)-(d). Please ensure the color scale is reproducible and, if possible, add contour labels or a separate legend.
  5. [Section 3, Fig. 5] The description of the neutron emission criterion ('17 fm or more beyond the center of mass along the fission axis') would benefit from a brief justification, since the result is stated in the abstract as a notable finding and the interpretation of the early-time jump as removal of constraints is only a hypothesis.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: central claims are direct TDDFT trajectory outputs, not quantities fitted to the claims.

full rationale

I find no circular derivation in this paper. The central claims—strong dissipative damping of the collective flow energy, rapid relaxation of Q20, and large-amplitude nearly harmonic Q30 oscillations in the isomeric well—are direct outputs of TDDFT trajectories evolved with the LISE code; none of these quantities is fitted to reproduce the claims, and no parameter is adjusted to make the oscillations appear. The methods and comparisons cite prior work by the same group (e.g., the LISE solver and saddle-to-scission studies), but those citations supply the computational framework and baseline phenomenology, not the target results, and the solver is a separately published code. The octupole oscillation period T≈960±70 fm/c and the qualitative critical-Q30 threshold are read off the trajectories rather than derived from a fitted model, so no step reduces by construction to its inputs. The acknowledged axial-symmetry restriction is a limitation on domain validity, not a circularity: it concerns omitted triaxial degrees of freedom and does not make any claimed result equivalent to an input. No equation is defined in terms of the quantity it is used to predict, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

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

No new entities or fitted constants are introduced. The central results rest on the mean-field model, the axial symmetry restriction, and the chosen initial conditions, all of which are acknowledged limitations in the paper.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption TDDFT with the superfluid local density approximation describes the dynamics of 236U in the wells with sufficient accuracy.
    The entire work is a simulation with the LISE solver; no comparison to independent data for the wells is provided.
  • ad hoc to paper Axially symmetric shapes are sufficient for the studied dynamics.
    The paper explicitly restricts to axial symmetry and cites refs. [52,53] that triaxiality matters near the first barrier.
  • domain assumption The initial states prepared by constrained DFT and released at t=0 correspond to physically relevant post-neutron-capture configurations.
    The initial 'red dots' are chosen at various deformations/excitations; the release of constraints at t=0 causes an initial burst of neutron emission.
  • domain assumption The fissioning nuclear system formed after neutron absorption can be represented by a single generalized Slater determinant.
    Stated in footnote 1; this is the mean-field starting point and excludes correlated compound-nucleus dynamics.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Large Amplitude Collective Motion and Dissipation in the Ground State and the First Isomeric Wells in the Neutron-Induced Fission of $^{235}$U." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VGG3XIGN

@misc{pith2026260808875,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Large Amplitude Collective Motion and Dissipation in the Ground State and the First Isomeric Wells in the Neutron-Induced Fission of $^235$U},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VGG3XIGN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.08875}
}
abstract

In fission induced by low energy neutrons, the mother nucleus spends a significant fraction of the time in the ground state and isomer wells, eventually passing beyond the outer barrier, where the primary fission fragments properties are defined. Despite this, the dynamics of these two early stages have not been investigated using microscopic models. This study examines the evolution of the mother nucleus in both wells separately, using time-dependent density functional theory, which has been previously used to treat the saddle-to-scission stage of fission for $^{235}$U(n,f) reactions. These two early stages of fission are essential blocks in the final theory of the formation and evolution of a compound nucleus. The present study shows that the dynamics in both wells is strongly dissipative, similar to the dynamics from saddle to scission. It also reveals that while the initial mass asymmetry of the system quickly settles to very small fluctuations in the ground state well, in the isomeric well, the mass asymmetry oscillates with a rather large amplitude, in almost harmonic motion. Furthermore, with low probability, neutrons are emitted in both wells.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.08875 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Panels (a) and (b) show the evolution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. The collective flow energy, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. The quantity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Panel (a) shows the FNS’s quadrupole moment as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. The number of neutrons emitted as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Future of nuclear fission theory,

    M. Bender andet al., “Future of nuclear fission theory,” J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys.47, 113002 (2020)

    2020

  2. [2]

    Neutron Capture and Nuclear Constitution,

    N. Bohr, “Neutron Capture and Nuclear Constitution,” Nature137, 344 and 351 (1936)

    work page 1936

  3. [3]

    Neutron Capture and Nuclear Constitution,

    Editorial, “Neutron Capture and Nuclear Constitution,” Nature137, 351 (1936)

    1936

  4. [4]

    Bohr and B

    A. Bohr and B. R. Mottelson,Nuclear Structure, Vol. I (Benjamin Inc., New York, 1969)

    work page 1969

  5. [5]

    New precision measurements of the 235U(n, γ)cross section,

    M. Jandel andothers, “New precision measurements of the 235U(n, γ)cross section,” Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 202506 (2012)

    work page 2012

  6. [6]

    Crystal Blocking Measure- ments of the Time Delay of Fission Induced by 32S, 48Ti, and 58NiBombardment of W,

    J. U. Andersen andothers, “Crystal Blocking Measure- ments of the Time Delay of Fission Induced by 32S, 48Ti, and 58NiBombardment of W,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 162502 (2007)

    work page 2007

  7. [7]

    Fission time measurements: A new probe into superheavy element stability,

    M. Morjean andothers, “Fission time measurements: A new probe into superheavy element stability,” Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 072701 (2008)

    work page 2008

  8. [8]

    xparimentalmeasures of fission time scales,

    B. B. Back, “xparimentalmeasures of fission time scales,” JPS Conf. Proc.32, 010002 (2020)

    work page 2020

Show all 56 references
  1. [9]

    Quasi-fission — the mass-drift mode in heavy-ion reactions,

    J. T¯ oke andothers, “Quasi-fission — the mass-drift mode in heavy-ion reactions,” Nucl. Phys. A440, 327 (1985)

    1985

  2. [10]

    Mapping quasifission charac- teristics and timescales in heavy element formation reac- tions,

    R. du Rietz andothers, “Mapping quasifission charac- teristics and timescales in heavy element formation reac- tions,” Phys. Rev. C88, 054618 (2013)

    2013

  3. [11]

    Exper- imental studies of the competition between fusion and quasifission in the formation of heavy and superheavy nuclei,

    D.J. Hinde, M. Dasgupta, and E.C. Simpson, “Exper- imental studies of the competition between fusion and quasifission in the formation of heavy and superheavy nuclei,” Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.118, 103856 (2021)

    2021

  4. [12]

    Nuclear Fission,

    R. Vandenbosch and J. R. Huizenga, “Nuclear Fission,” Academic Press, New York (1973)

    1973

  5. [13]

    Neutron and gamma emission in fis- sion,

    F. Gönnenwein, “Neutron and gamma emission in fis- sion,” LANL Fiesta 2014 Lectures (2014)

    2014

  6. [14]

    Fission dynamics of 240Pufrom saddle to scission and beyond,

    A.Bulgac, S.Jin, K.J.Roche, N.Schunck, andI.Stetcu, “Fission dynamics of 240Pufrom saddle to scission and beyond,” Phys. Rev. C100, 034615 (2019)

    2019

  7. [15]

    Nuclear Fission Dy- namics: Past, Present, Needs, and Future,

    A. Bulgac, S. Jin, and I. Stetcu, “Nuclear Fission Dy- namics: Past, Present, Needs, and Future,” Frontiers in Physics8, 63 (2020)

    2020

  8. [16]

    Time-Dependent Density Functional Theory Descrip- tion of 238U(n,f), 240,242Pu(n,f), and 237Np(n,f) Reac- tions,

    A. Bulgac, I. Abdurrahman, M. Kafker, and I. Stetcu, “Time-Dependent Density Functional Theory Descrip- tion of 238U(n,f), 240,242Pu(n,f), and 237Np(n,f) Reac- tions,” Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 062501 (2025)

    2025

  9. [17]

    Quantum tunnelling in a dissipative system,

    A.O Caldeira and A.J Leggett, “Quantum tunnelling in a dissipative system,” Ann. Phys.149, 374 (1983)

    1983

  10. [18]

    Barrier penetra- tionandspontaneousfissioninthetime-dependentmean- field approximation,

    S. Levit, J. W. Negele, and Z. Paltiel, “Barrier penetra- tionandspontaneousfissioninthetime-dependentmean- field approximation,” Phys. Rev. C22, 1979 (1980)

    1980

  11. [19]

    Micrscopic Theory of Fission Dynamics,

    J. W. Negele, “Micrscopic Theory of Fission Dynamics,” Nucl. Phys. A502, 371c

  12. [20]

    A critical assessment of the current imple- mentations of the Generator Coordinate Method, Phys. Rev. C (2026) in press,

    A. Bulgac, “A critical assessment of the current imple- mentations of the Generator Coordinate Method, Phys. Rev. C (2026) in press,” arXiv:2408.02173 [nucl-th]

    2026

  13. [21]

    Multi-Nucleon Transfer Re- actions and the Creation and the Evolution of the Com- pound Nucleus,

    M. Kafker and A. Bulgac, “Multi-Nucleon Transfer Re- actions and the Creation and the Evolution of the Com- pound Nucleus,” (2026), arXiv:2604.21845 [nucl-th]

    2026 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Angular Momentum Re- moval by Neutron andγ-Ray Emissions during Fission Fragment Decays,

    I. Stetcu, A. E. Lovell, P. Talou, T. Kawano, S. Marin, S. A. Pozzi, and A. Bulgac, “Angular Momentum Re- moval by Neutron andγ-Ray Emissions during Fission Fragment Decays,” Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 222502 (2021)

    2021

  15. [23]

    In- duced Fission of 240Puwithin a Real-Time Microscopic Framework,

    A. Bulgac, P. Magierski, K. J. Roche, and I. Stetcu, “In- duced Fission of 240Puwithin a Real-Time Microscopic Framework,” Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 122504 (2016)

    2016

  16. [24]

    Pure quantum extension of the semiclassical Boltzmann-Uehling-Uhlenbeck equation,

    A. Bulgac, “Pure quantum extension of the semiclassical Boltzmann-Uehling-Uhlenbeck equation,” Phys. Rev. C 105, L021601 (2022)

    2022

  17. [25]

    On the Kinetic Method in the New Statistics and its Application in the Electron Theory of Conductivity,

    L. W. Nordheim, “On the Kinetic Method in the New Statistics and its Application in the Electron Theory of Conductivity,” Proc. Roy. Soc. (London)A119, 689 (1928)

    1928

  18. [26]

    Transport Phenom- ena in Einstein-Bose and Fermi-Dirac Gases. I,

    E. A. Uehling and G. E. Uhlenbeck, “Transport Phenom- ena in Einstein-Bose and Fermi-Dirac Gases. I,” Phys. Rev.43, 552 (1933)

    1933

  19. [27]

    Non-Markovian character and irreversibility of real- time quantum many-body dynamics,

    A. Bulgac, M. Kafker, I. Abdurrahman, and I. Stetcu, “Non-Markovian character and irreversibility of real- time quantum many-body dynamics,” Phys. Rev. C109, 064617 (2024)

    2024

  20. [28]

    Systematics of nu- clear level density parameters,

    T. von Egidy and D. Bucurescu, “Systematics of nu- clear level density parameters,” Phys. Rev. C72, 044311 (2005)

    2005

  21. [29]

    Improved mi- croscopic nuclear level densities within the Hartree-Fock- Bogoliubov plus combinatorial method,

    S. Goriely, S. Hilaire, and A. J. Koning, “Improved mi- croscopic nuclear level densities within the Hartree-Fock- Bogoliubov plus combinatorial method,” Phys. Rev. C 78, 064307 (2008)

    2008

  22. [30]

    Fission fragment decay simulations with the CGMF code,

    P. Talou andothers, “Fission fragment decay simulations with the CGMF code,” Comp. Phys. Com.269, 108087 (2021)

    2021

  23. [31]

    Weitere Studien über das Wärmegle- ichgewicht unter Gasmolekülen,

    L. Boltzmann, “Weitere Studien über das Wärmegle- ichgewicht unter Gasmolekülen,” Sitzungsberichte Akademie der Wissenschaften66, 275 (1872)

  24. [32]

    The LISE package: solvers for static and time-dependent superfluid local density approximation equations in three dimentions,

    S. Jin, K. J. Roche, I. Stetcu, I. Abdurrahman, and A. Bulgac, “The LISE package: solvers for static and time-dependent superfluid local density approximation equations in three dimentions,” Comp. Phys. Comm. 269, 108130 (2021)

    2021

  25. [33]

    Sen- sitivity of time-dependent density functional theory to initial conditions,

    A. Bulgac, I. Abdurrahman, and G. Wlazłowski, “Sen- sitivity of time-dependent density functional theory to initial conditions,” Phys. Rev. C105, 044601 (2022)

    2022

  26. [34]

    Sur le problème des trois corps et les équa- tions de la dynamique,

    H. Poincaré, “Sur le problème des trois corps et les équa- tions de la dynamique,” Acta Mathematica13, 1 (1890)

  27. [35]

    Beweis des Ergodensatzes und desH- Theorems in der neuen Mechanik,

    J. v. Neumann, “Beweis des Ergodensatzes und desH- Theorems in der neuen Mechanik,” Zeitschrift für Physik 57, 30 (1929)

    1929

  28. [36]

    Proof of the ergodic theorem and the H-theorem in quantum mechanics,

    J. von Neumann, “Proof of the ergodic theorem and the H-theorem in quantum mechanics,” The European Phys- ical Journal H35, 201 (2010)

    2010

  29. [37]

    Long-time behavior of macroscopic quantum systems,

    S.Goldstein, J.L.Lebowitz, R.Tumulka, andN.Zanghì, “Long-time behavior of macroscopic quantum systems,” The European Physical Journal H35, 173 (2010)

    2010

  30. [38]

    Regular and irregular semiclassical wave- functions,

    M. V. Berry, “Regular and irregular semiclassical wave- functions,” J. Phys. A: Mathematical and General10, 2083 (1977)

    1977

  31. [39]

    Les Houches LII, Chaos and Quantum Physics,

    M. V. Berry, “Les Houches LII, Chaos and Quantum Physics,” (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1991)

    1991

  32. [40]

    Quantum statistical mechanics in a closed system,

    J. M. Deutsch, “Quantum statistical mechanics in a closed system,” Phys. Rev. A43, 2046–2049 (1991)

    1991

  33. [41]

    Chaos and quantum thermalization,

    M. Srednicki, “Chaos and quantum thermalization,” Phys. Rev. E50, 888 (1994)

    1994

  34. [42]

    Alternatives to Eigenstate Thermalization,

    M. Rigol and M. Srednicki, “Alternatives to Eigenstate Thermalization,” Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 110601 (2012). 7

    2012

  35. [43]

    Quantumturbulence, superfluidity, non- markovian dynamics, and wave function thermalization,

    A. Bulgac, M. Kafker, I. Abdurrahman, and G. Wlazłowski, “Quantumturbulence, superfluidity, non- markovian dynamics, and wave function thermalization,” Phys. Rev. Res.6, L042003 (2024)

    2024

  36. [44]

    Bound-State Eigenfunctions of Classically Chaotic Hamiltonian Systems: Scars of Periodic Orbits,

    E. J. Heller, “Bound-State Eigenfunctions of Classically Chaotic Hamiltonian Systems: Scars of Periodic Orbits,” Phys. Rev. Lett.53, 1515 (1984)

    1984

  37. [45]

    ThePara- doxical Phenomenon of Quantum Scarring,

    L.Kaplan, E.Heller, andJ.Keski-Rahkonen,“ThePara- doxical Phenomenon of Quantum Scarring,” Physics To- day79, 27 (2026)

    2026

  38. [46]

    Character- ization of Chaotic Quantum Spectra and Universality of Level Fluctuation Laws,

    O. Bohigas, M. J. Giannoni, and C. Schmit, “Character- ization of Chaotic Quantum Spectra and Universality of Level Fluctuation Laws,” Phys. Rev. Lett.52, 1 (1984)

    1984

  39. [47]

    Manifestations of classical phase space structures in quantum mechan- ics,

    O. Bohigas, S. Tomsovic, and D. Ullmo, “Manifestations of classical phase space structures in quantum mechan- ics,” Physics Reports223, 43–133 (1993)

    1993

  40. [48]

    M. L. Mehta,RANDOM MATRICES and the Statistical Theory of Energy Levels(Academic Press, New York, 1991)

    1991

  41. [49]

    Chaos vs Thermalization in the Nuclear Shell Model,

    M. Horoi, V. Zelevinsky, and B. A. Brown, “Chaos vs Thermalization in the Nuclear Shell Model,” Phys. Rev. Lett.74, 5194 (1995)

    1995

  42. [50]

    The nuclear shell model as a testing ground for many-body quantum chaos,

    V. Zelevinsky, B. A. Brown, N. F., and M. Horoi, “The nuclear shell model as a testing ground for many-body quantum chaos,” Phys. Rep.276, 85 (1996)

    1996

  43. [51]

    Haake, S

    F. Haake, S. Gnutzmann, and M. Kuś,Quantum Signa- tures of Chaos(Springer, 2018)

    2018

  44. [52]

    Equilibrium configurations of rotating charged or gravitating liquid masses with surface tension. ii,

    S. Cohen, F. Plasil, and W. J. Swiatecki, “Equilibrium configurations of rotating charged or gravitating liquid masses with surface tension. ii,” Ann. Phys.82, 557–596 (1974)

    1974

  45. [53]

    Numerical accuracy of mean-field calculations in coordinate space,

    W. Ryssens, P.-H. Heenen, and M. Bender, “Numerical accuracy of mean-field calculations in coordinate space,” Phys. Rev. C92, 064318 (2015)

    2015

  46. [54]

    Influence of the exit channel in235u(n,f) and 239pu(n,f) reactions in time-dependent density functional theory,

    I. Abdurrahman, M. Kafker, A. Bulgac, and I. Stetcu, “Influence of the exit channel in235u(n,f) and 239pu(n,f) reactions in time-dependent density functional theory,” (2026), arXiv:2607.18511 [nucl-th]

    2026 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Bohr, inProc

    A. Bohr, inProc. Int. Conf. Peaceful Uses At. Energy, Geneva, 1955, Vol. 2 (United Nations, New York, 1956) p. 151

    1955

  48. [56]

    Neck Rupture and Scission Neutrons in Nuclear Fis- sion,

    I. Abdurrahman, M. Kafker, A. Bulgac, and I. Stetcu, “Neck Rupture and Scission Neutrons in Nuclear Fis- sion,” Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 242501 (2024)

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.