Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 511

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Shell structure of superheavy nuclei in self-consistent mean-field models

Open access
Bender, M., Rutz, K., Reinhard, P.-G., Maruhn, J. A., Greiner, W.·1999·Physical Review C

Abstract

We study the extrapolation of nuclear shell structure to the region of superheavy nuclei in self-consistent mean-field models---the Skyrme-Hartree-Fock approach and the relativistic mean-field model---using a large number of parametrizations which give similar results for stable nuclei but differ in detail. Results obtained with the folded-Yukawa potential which is widely used in macroscopic-macroscopic models are shown for comparison. We focus on differences in the isospin dependence of the spin-orbit interaction and the effective mass between the models and their influence on single-particle spectra. The predictive power of the mean-field models concerning single-particle spectra is discussed for the examples of ${}^{208}\mathrm{Pb}$ and the spin-orbit splittings of selected neutron and proton levels in ${}^{16}\mathrm{O},$ ${}^{132}\mathrm{Sn},$ and ${}^{208}\mathrm{Pb}.$ While all relativistic models give a reasonable description of spin-orbit splittings, all Skyrme interactions show a wrong trend with mass number. The spin-orbit splitting of heavy nuclei might be overestimated by 40%--80%, which exposes a fundamental deficiency of the current nonrelativistic models. In most cases the occurrence of spherical shell closures is found to be nucleon-number dependent. Spherical doubly magic superheavy nuclei are found at ${}_{184}^{298}114,$ ${}_{172}^{292}120,$ or ${}_{184}^{310}126$ depending on the parametrization. The $Z=114$ proton shell closure, which is related to a large spin-orbit splitting of proton $2f$ states, is predicted only by forces which by far overestimate the proton spin-orbit splitting in ${}^{208}\mathrm{Pb}.$ The $Z=120$ and $N=172$ shell closures predicted by the relativistic models and some Skyrme interactions are found to be related to a central depression of the nuclear density distribution. This effect cannot appear in macroscopic-microscopic models or semiclassical approaches like the extended Thomas-Fermi-Strutinski integral approach which have a limited freedom for the density distribution only. In summary, our findings give a strong argument for ${}_{172}^{292}120$ to be the next spherical doubly magic superheavy nucleus.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physrevc.60.034304

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 511

Metadata

Authors
Bender, M., Rutz, K., Reinhard, P.-G., Maruhn, J. A., & Greiner, W.
Venue
Physical Review C
Published
1999-08-11
Volume
60
Issue
3
ISSN
  • 0556-2813 (ISSN-L)
  • 1089-490X
OpenAlex
W1973866744
Cited by
511
References
16
FWCI
7.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.