pith. sign in

arxiv: 2510.18577 · v2 · submitted 2025-10-21 · ⚛️ nucl-th

α-decay systematics for superheavy nucleus: the effect of deformation of daughter nucleus

Jinyu Hu , Chen Wu This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 05:14 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ nucl-th
keywords alpha decaysuperheavy nucleidaughter nucleus deformationhalf-livesempirical formulasDUR modelAKRA modelGeiger-Nuttall law
0
0 comments X

The pith

Incorporating deformation of the daughter nucleus into three standard alpha-decay formulas improves their fit to measured half-lives in superheavy elements.

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

The paper tests whether a deformation correction for the daughter nucleus can be added to existing empirical formulas to better describe alpha-decay half-lives of superheavy nuclei. The authors insert Denisov's correction into the DUR model, the AKRA model, and the New Geiger-Nuttall law to produce three modified versions. They then compare the original and modified forms of all three models against data for 400 isotopes. The modified AKRA version shows the smallest deviations from experiment. The same improved formulas are used to forecast decay properties for 71 even-even nuclei with proton numbers 118, 120, 122, and 124.

Core claim

By generalizing the deformation correction proposed by Denisov, the authors obtain modified DUR, AKRA, and New Geiger-Nuttall formulas whose predictions for alpha-decay half-lives agree more closely with experiment than the unmodified versions. Among the six models examined, the modified AKRA model reproduces the data most accurately. When the modified formulas and the original ND formula are applied to even-even superheavy nuclei, the resulting half-life estimates remain largely consistent, except that the modified DUR and AKRA models give larger values once the neutron number exceeds 190, an effect the authors attribute to the extra higher-order deformation terms retained in those models.

What carries the argument

Denisov's empirical correction for the deformation of the daughter nucleus, inserted directly into the DUR, AKRA, and New Geiger-Nuttall half-life formulas to adjust the decay rate for the non-spherical shape of the residual nucleus.

If this is right

  • Among the six models the modified AKRA formula matches the experimental half-lives most closely.
  • For nuclei with neutron number N greater than 190 the modified DUR and AKRA models predict longer half-lives than the ND formula.
  • The difference at high neutron number is linked to the inclusion of hexadecapole and hexacontatetrapole deformation contributions that are absent from the ND formula.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same deformation adjustment could be tested on odd-mass nuclei to see whether pairing effects require separate corrections.
  • Systematic use of the modified formulas might help map how deformation competes with shell closures in the stability of superheavy elements.
  • Fresh half-life data in the predicted region would directly test whether the extra deformation terms improve accuracy or introduce new systematic offsets.

Load-bearing premise

The specific deformation correction can be inserted into the DUR, AKRA, and New Geiger-Nuttall formulas without any re-fitting of their other parameters.

What would settle it

A new measurement of the alpha-decay half-life for an even-even nucleus with Z near 120 and N greater than 190 would show whether the modified models overpredict relative to the ND formula.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.18577 by Chen Wu, Jinyu Hu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. The difference between theoretical and experimental [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. The difference between theoretical and experimental [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. The difference between theoretical and experimental [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. The difference between theoretical and experimental [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Plot of the logarithm of half-life (seconds) for the models DUR+D, and AKRA+D vs neutron number N for Z = 118 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Plot of the logarithm of half-life (seconds) for the models DUR+D, and AKRA+D vs neutron number N for Z = 120 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Plot of the logarithm of half-life (seconds) for the models DUR+D, and AKRA+D vs neutron number N for Z = 122 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Plot of the logarithm of half-life (seconds) for the models DUR+D, and AKRA+D vs neutron number N for Z = 124 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Recently, V.Yu. Denisov proposed a new empirical formula incorporating the deformation of the daughter nucleus, which has significantly improved the description of $\alpha$-decay half-lives for even-even nuclei compared to formulas neglecting the deformation of the daughter nucleus. In this work, we generalize the deformation of the daughter nucleus proposed by V.Yu. Denisov to the DUR model, the AKRA model, the New Geiger-Nuttall law, generating three improved versions of these models. We then employ both the original and modified the DUR model, the AKRA model, and the New Geiger-Nuttall law to investigate the $\alpha$-decay half-lives of 400 isotopes. Results show that among the six models, the modified AKRA model provides the closest agreement with experimental $\alpha$-decay half-life data. For comparative analysis, we use the new empirical formulas developed for the DUR model (DUR+D), the AKRA model (AKRA+D) and a new empirical (ND) proposed by V.Yu. Denisov to predict the $\alpha$-decay properties of 71 even-even nuclei with Z = 118, 120, 122, and 124. The predictions from the DUR+D model, the AKRA+D model, and ND are largely consistent overall. Notably, when the neutron number $N>190$, the predictions from the DUR+D model and the AKRA+D model exceed those of ND, which may be attributed to additional physical contributions (e.g., the hexadecapole and the hexacontatetrapole deformation of the deformed daughter nucleus) incorporated in the DUR+D model and the AKRA+D model but not in ND.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript generalizes Denisov's empirical deformation correction for the daughter nucleus to the DUR, AKRA, and New Geiger-Nuttall models for α-decay half-lives. It compares the original and modified versions of these models using data from 400 isotopes, finding that the modified AKRA model agrees most closely with experiment. The modified models are then used to predict half-lives for 71 even-even superheavy nuclei with Z = 118 to 124, showing overall consistency with Denisov's ND formula but deviations for N > 190.

Significance. If the comparative ranking holds after proper validation, the work could improve empirical predictions of α-decay half-lives for superheavy nuclei by including deformation effects of the daughter, aiding experimental searches for new elements. The evaluation on a dataset of 400 isotopes provides a reasonably broad test bed, and the consistency check among three modified formulas for Z=118-124 nuclei is a useful cross-check.

major comments (2)
  1. Abstract: the claim that the modified AKRA model provides the closest agreement with experimental α-decay half-life data among the six models is presented without any quantitative metrics (RMS deviation, χ², or correlation coefficients), details on data selection criteria for the 400 isotopes, or validation statistics, making it impossible to assess whether the ranking is statistically significant or merely qualitative.
  2. Methods/Results (generalization of Denisov correction): the deformation term is inserted directly into the DUR, AKRA, and New Geiger-Nuttall formulas without re-optimizing any parameters on the same 400-isotope dataset used for comparison. Because the three baseline models differ in functional form and number of free parameters, an unadjusted grafting can alter relative performance through interaction effects rather than intrinsic merit; this assumption is load-bearing for the central ranking claim.
minor comments (2)
  1. Abstract: the sentence 'we employ both the original and modified the DUR model...' contains a grammatical repetition that should be corrected for clarity.
  2. Predictions section: the attribution of differences for N>190 to hexadecapole and hexacontatetrapole deformations is stated qualitatively; adding a brief quantitative estimate or reference to supporting microscopic calculations would strengthen the discussion.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments, which help improve the clarity and rigor of the presentation. We address each major comment below and indicate the planned revisions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Abstract: the claim that the modified AKRA model provides the closest agreement with experimental α-decay half-life data among the six models is presented without any quantitative metrics (RMS deviation, χ², or correlation coefficients), details on data selection criteria for the 400 isotopes, or validation statistics, making it impossible to assess whether the ranking is statistically significant or merely qualitative.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract would benefit from explicit quantitative support for the ranking claim. The body of the manuscript already contains tables and figures reporting RMS deviations and other fit statistics for all six models on the 400-isotope set. We will revise the abstract to include the key RMS values (or equivalent metrics) that establish the modified AKRA model as the closest to experiment, and we will add a concise statement on the data selection (even-even nuclei with measured α-decay half-lives) to make the claim self-contained and statistically grounded. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Methods/Results (generalization of Denisov correction): the deformation term is inserted directly into the DUR, AKRA, and New Geiger-Nuttall formulas without re-optimizing any parameters on the same 400-isotope dataset used for comparison. Because the three baseline models differ in functional form and number of free parameters, an unadjusted grafting can alter relative performance through interaction effects rather than intrinsic merit; this assumption is load-bearing for the central ranking claim.

    Authors: The referee correctly identifies a methodological choice whose implications deserve explicit discussion. Our approach followed Denisov’s empirical prescription by adding the deformation term directly, keeping the original parameters fixed, in order to isolate the incremental effect of the daughter deformation across models of different functional forms. This uniform grafting permits a transparent before-and-after comparison on the identical dataset. Nevertheless, we recognize that re-optimization of the free parameters for each modified model could shift the relative rankings and would constitute a stronger validation. We will therefore perform a least-squares re-optimization of the modified DUR, AKRA, and New Geiger-Nuttall models on the 400-isotope set, present the resulting RMS values and ranking, and discuss any changes relative to the unadjusted results in the revised manuscript. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in model generalization or empirical comparison

full rationale

The paper imports Denisov's external deformation correction for even-even nuclei and applies it to the existing DUR, AKRA, and New Geiger-Nuttall formulas to produce modified versions. It then directly compares the six formulas (original and modified) against experimental half-lives for 400 isotopes, identifying the modified AKRA as closest. Predictions for 71 new even-even nuclei follow from these formulas and are cross-checked against Denisov's ND formula. No quoted equations or steps reduce by construction to the paper's own fitted inputs; the central ranking rests on external data agreement rather than self-definition, self-citation chains, or renaming of known results. The derivation chain is self-contained against the stated experimental benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work rests on empirical generalization of a prior formula; free parameters are the coefficients in each model that are adjusted to data, and the key assumption is that the deformation term transfers without modification.

free parameters (1)
  • deformation correction coefficients
    Coefficients that multiply the deformation term when the formula is generalized to each model; these are fitted to experimental half-lives.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The deformation effect identified by Denisov for even-even nuclei applies uniformly to the functional forms of DUR, AKRA, and New Geiger-Nuttall laws.
    Invoked when the authors state they 'generalize the deformation of the daughter nucleus proposed by V.Yu. Denisov to the DUR model, the AKRA model, the New Geiger-Nuttall law'.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5840 in / 1338 out tokens · 37037 ms · 2026-05-18T05:14:28.144330+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Xingzhi College, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua, 321004, Zhejiang, China Recently, V .Yu. Denisov proposed a new empirical formula incorporating the deformation of the daughter nu- cleus, which has significantly improved the description ofα-decay half-lives for even-even nuclei compared to formulas neglecting the deformation of the daughter nucleus. I...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1908

  2. [2]

    W. Qu, G. Zhang, H. Zhang, and R. Wolski, Comparative stud- ies of coulomb barrier heights for nuclear models applied to sub-barrier fusion, Physical Review C90, 064603 (2014)

    work page 2014

  3. [3]

    A. Zdeb, M. Warda, and K. Pomorski, Half-lives forαand clus- ter radioactivity within a gamow-like model, Physical Review C—Nuclear Physics87, 024308 (2013)

    work page 2013

  4. [4]

    Sun, J.-G

    X.-D. Sun, J.-G. Deng, D. Xiang, P. Guo, and X.-H. Li, System- atic study ofαdecay half-lives of doubly odd nuclei within the two-potential approach, Physical Review C95, 044303 (2017)

    work page 2017

  5. [5]

    Santhosh, C

    K. Santhosh, C. Nithya, H. Hassanabadi, and D. T. Akrawy,α- decay half-lives of superheavy nuclei from a modified general- ized liquid-drop model, Physical Review C98, 024625 (2018)

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    Hosseini, H

    S. Hosseini, H. Hassanabadi, and D. T. Akrawy,α-decay half- lives of even–even nuclei of pb, po, rn and ra isotopes, Interna- tional Journal of Modern Physics E28, 1950017 (2019)

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    Y . T. Oganessian, F. S. Abdullin, P. Bailey, D. Benker, M. Ben- nett, S. Dmitriev, J. G. Ezold, J. Hamilton, R. A. Henderson, M. Itkis,et al., Synthesis of a new element with atomic number z= 117, Physical review letters104, 142502 (2010)

    work page 2010

  8. [8]

    Oganessian, Heaviest nuclei from 48ca-induced reactions, Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics34, R165 (2007)

    Y . Oganessian, Heaviest nuclei from 48ca-induced reactions, Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics34, R165 (2007)

    work page 2007

  9. [9]

    Hosseini and H

    S. Hosseini and H. Hassanabadi, Theoretical approaches to al- pha decay half-lives of super-heavy nuclei, Chinese Physics C 41, 064101 (2017)

    work page 2017

  10. [10]

    D. T. Akrawy and A. H. Ahmed,α-decay systematics for su- perheavy nuclei, Physical Review C100, 044618 (2019)

    work page 2019

  11. [11]

    Javadimanesh, H

    E. Javadimanesh, H. Hassanabadi, A. Rajabi, H. Rahimov, and S. Zarrinkamar, Investigation of deformed nuclei with a new potential combination, Chinese Physics C37, 114102 (2013)

    work page 2013

  12. [12]

    P. E. Hodgson and E. Bˇeták, Cluster emission, transfer and cap- ture in nuclear reactions, Physics reports374, 1 (2003)

    work page 2003

  13. [13]

    Geiger and J

    H. Geiger and J. Nuttall, Lvii. the ranges of theαparticles from various radioactive substances and a relation between range and period of transformation, The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science22, 613 (1911)

    work page 1911

  14. [14]

    S. Guo, X. Bao, Y . Gao, J. Li, and H. Zhang, The nuclear de- formation and the preformation factor in theα-decay of heavy and superheavy nuclei, Nuclear Physics A934, 110 (2015)

    work page 2015

  15. [15]

    Zhang, W

    H. Zhang, W. Zuo, J. Li, and G. Royer,αdecay half-lives of new superheavy nuclei within a generalized liquid drop model, Physical Review C—Nuclear Physics74, 017304 (2006)

    work page 2006

  16. [16]

    Zanganah, D

    V . Zanganah, D. T. Akrawy, H. Hassanabadi, S. Hosseini, and S. Thakur, Calculation ofα-decay and cluster half-lives for 197–226fr using temperature-dependent proximity potential model, Nuclear Physics A997, 121714 (2020)

    work page 2020

  17. [17]

    W. Yahya, Alpha decay half-lives of 171-189hg isotopes using modified gamow-like model and temperature dependent prox- imity potential, Journal of the Nigerian Society of Physical Sci- ences , 250 (2020)

    work page 2020

  18. [18]

    Gurvitz and G

    S. Gurvitz and G. Kalbermann, Decay width and the shift of a quasistationary state, Physical review letters59, 262 (1987)

    work page 1987

  19. [19]

    Moghaddari Amiri and O

    M. Moghaddari Amiri and O. Ghodsi, Influence of the pauli exclusion principle onαdecay, Physical Review C102, 054602 (2020)

    work page 2020

  20. [20]

    Jian-Min, Z

    D. Jian-Min, Z. Hong-Fei, W. Yan-Zhao, Z. Wei, S. Xin-Ning, and L. Jun-Qing,α-decay half-lives of superheavy nuclei and general predictions, Chinese Physics C33, 633 (2009)

    work page 2009

  21. [21]

    Yan-Zhao, Z

    W. Yan-Zhao, Z. Hong-Fei, D. Jian-Min, S. Xin-Ning, Z. Wei, and L. Jun-Qing, Branching ratios ofαdecay for nuclei near deformed shell closures, Chinese Physics Letters26, 062101 (2009)

    work page 2009

  22. [22]

    Royer, Alpha emission and spontaneous fission through quasi-molecular shapes, Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Par- ticle Physics26, 1149 (2000)

    G. Royer, Alpha emission and spontaneous fission through quasi-molecular shapes, Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Par- ticle Physics26, 1149 (2000)

    work page 2000

  23. [23]

    Viola Jr and G

    V . Viola Jr and G. Seaborg, Nuclear systematics of the heavy elements—ii lifetimes for alpha, beta and spontaneous fission decay, Journal of Inorganic and Nuclear Chemistry28, 741 (1966)

    work page 1966

  24. [24]

    C. Qi, F. Xu, R. J. Liotta, and R. Wyss, Universal decay law in charged-particle emission and exotic cluster radioactivity, Phys- ical review letters103, 072501 (2009)

    work page 2009

  25. [25]

    Ren and Z

    Y . Ren and Z. Ren, New geiger-nuttall law forαdecay of heavy nuclei, Physical Review C—Nuclear Physics85, 044608 (2012)

    work page 2012

  26. [26]

    Koura, Phenomenological formula for alpha-decay half- lives, Journal of nuclear science and technology49, 816 (2012)

    H. Koura, Phenomenological formula for alpha-decay half- lives, Journal of nuclear science and technology49, 816 (2012)

    work page 2012

  27. [27]

    Saxena, A

    G. Saxena, A. Jain, and P. Sharma, A new empirical formula for α-decay half-life and decay chains of z= 120 isotopes, Physica Scripta96, 125304 (2021)

    work page 2021

  28. [28]

    Soylu and C

    A. Soylu and C. Qi, Extended universal decay law formula for theαand cluster decays, Nuclear Physics A1013, 122221 (2021)

    work page 2021

  29. [29]

    D. T. Akrawy, D. N. Poenaru, A. H. Ahmed, and L. Si- hver,α-decay half-lives new semi-empirical relationship in- cluding asymmetry, angular momentum and shell effects, Nu- clear Physics A1021, 122419 (2022)

    work page 2022

  30. [30]

    D. T. Akrawy and D. Poenaru, Alpha decay calculations with a new formula, Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics44, 105105 (2017)

    work page 2017

  31. [31]

    D. T. Akrawy and A. H. Ahmed, New empirical formula forα- decay calculations, International Journal of Modern Physics E 27, 1850068 (2018)

    work page 2018

  32. [32]

    D. T. Akrawy, A. Budaca, G. Saxena, and A. H. Ahmed, Gener- alization of the screened universalα-decay law by asymmetry and angular momentum, The European Physical Journal A58, 145 (2022)

    work page 2022

  33. [33]

    M. Yu, M. Xu, Z. Liu, and L. Liu, Model investigation on the probability of qgp formation at different centralities in relativis- tic heavy ion collisions, Physical Review C—Nuclear Physics 80, 064908 (2009)

    work page 2009

  34. [34]

    Ismail, W

    M. Ismail, W. Seif, A. Adel, and A. Abdurrahman, Alpha-decay of deformed superheavy nuclei as a probe of shell closures, Nu- clear Physics A958, 202 (2017)

    work page 2017

  35. [35]

    Deng and Z

    D. Deng and Z. Ren, Improved double-foldingα-nucleus po- tential by including nuclear medium effects, Physical Review C 96, 064306 (2017)

    work page 2017

  36. [36]

    V . Y . Denisov and A. Khudenko, Erratum:αdecay of even- even superheavy elements [phys. rev. c 81, 034613 (2010)], Physical Review C—Nuclear Physics82, 059903 (2010)

    work page 2010

  37. [37]

    V . Y . Denisov, Empirical relations forα-decay half-lives: The effect of deformation of daughter nuclei, Physical Review C 110, 014604 (2024)

    work page 2024

  38. [38]

    N. Wang, M. Liu, X. Wu, and J. Meng, Surface diffuseness correction in global mass formula, Physics Letters B734, 215 (2014)

    work page 2014

  39. [39]

    Deng, H.-F

    J.-G. Deng, H.-F. Zhang, and G. Royer, Improved empirical for- mula forα-decay half-lives, Physical Review C101, 034307 (2020). 7 FIG. 3. The difference between theoretical and experimentalα-decay half-lives for all formulas of set even-odd. FIG. 4. The difference between theoretical and experimentalα-decay half-lives for all formulas of set even-even. TA...

    work page 2020