Comparison of statistical model calculations for stable isotope neutron capture

被引:39
作者
Beard, M. [1 ,2 ]
Uberseder, E. [1 ]
Crowter, R. [1 ]
Wiescher, M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Notre Dame, Dept Phys, Notre Dame, IN 46556 USA
[2] GSI Helmholtzzentrum Schwerionenforsch, EMMI, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany
来源
PHYSICAL REVIEW C | 2014年 / 90卷 / 03期
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
NUCLEAR-LEVEL-DENSITY; ASTROPHYSICAL REACTION-RATES; CROSS-SECTIONS; R-PROCESS; STRENGTH FUNCTIONS; FINITE NUCLEI; S-PROCESS; NUCLEOSYNTHESIS; RESONANCE; FORMULA;
D O I
10.1103/PhysRevC.90.034619
中图分类号
O57 [原子核物理学、高能物理学];
学科分类号
070202 ;
摘要
It is a well-observed result that different nuclear input models sensitively affect Hauser-Feshbach (HF) cross-section calculations. Less well-known, however, are the effects on calculations originating from nonmodel aspects, such as experimental data truncation and transmission function energy binning, as well as code-dependent aspects, such as the definition of level-density matching energy and the inclusion of shell correction terms in the level-density parameter. To investigate these aspects, Maxwellian-averaged neutron capture cross sections (MACS) at 30 keV have been calculated using the well-established statistical Hauser-Feshbach model codes TALYS and NON-SMOKER for approximately 340 nuclei. For the same nuclei, MACS predictions have also been obtained using two new HF codes, CIGAR and SAPPHIRE. Details of these two codes, which have been developed to contain an overlapping set of identically implemented nuclear physics input models, are presented. It is generally accepted that HF calculations are valid to within a factor of 3. It was found that this factor is dependent on both model and nonmodel details, such as the coarseness of the transmission function energy binning and data truncation, as well as variances in details regarding the implementation of level-density parameter, backshift, matching energy, and giant dipole strength function parameters.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 66 条
[1]   Heavy deformed nuclei in the shell model Monte Carlo method [J].
Alhassid, Y. ;
Fang, L. ;
Nakada, H. .
PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, 2008, 101 (08)
[2]  
Allen B., 1971, ADV NUCL PHYS, P205
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2002, CERN N TOF FAC PERF
[4]   The r-process of stellar nucleosynthesis: Astrophysics and nuclear physics achievements and mysteries [J].
Arnould, M. ;
Goriely, S. ;
Takahashi, K. .
PHYSICS REPORTS-REVIEW SECTION OF PHYSICS LETTERS, 2007, 450 (4-6) :97-213
[5]   Microscopic nuclear models for astrophysics: The Brussels BRUSLIB nuclear library and beyond [J].
Arnould, M. ;
Goriely, S. .
NUCLEAR PHYSICS A, 2006, 777 :157-187
[6]   The AME2012 atomic mass evaluation (I). Evaluation of input data, adjustment procedures [J].
Audi, G. ;
Wang, M. ;
Wapstra, A. H. ;
Kondev, F. G. ;
MacCormick, M. ;
Xu, X. ;
Pfeiffer, B. .
CHINESE PHYSICS C, 2012, 36 (12) :1287-1602
[7]   ELECTRIC DIPOLE GROUND-STATE TRANSITION WIDTH STRENGTH FUNCTION AND 7-MEV PHOTON INTERACTIONS [J].
AXEL, P .
PHYSICAL REVIEW, 1962, 126 (02) :671-&
[8]   Neutron cross sections for nucleosynthesis studies [J].
Bao, ZY ;
Beer, H ;
Käppeler, F ;
Voss, F ;
Wisshak, K ;
Rauscher, T .
ATOMIC DATA AND NUCLEAR DATA TABLES, 2000, 76 (01) :70-154
[9]   NEUTRON-CAPTURE CROSS-SECTIONS FOR S-PROCESS STUDIES [J].
BAO, ZY ;
KAPPELER, F .
ATOMIC DATA AND NUCLEAR DATA TABLES, 1987, 36 (03) :411-451
[10]   Photonuclear and radiative-capture reaction rates for nuclear astrophysics and transmutation: 92-100Mo, 88Sr, 90Zr, and 139La [J].
Beard, M. ;
Frauendorf, S. ;
Kaempfer, B. ;
Schwengner, R. ;
Wiescher, M. .
PHYSICAL REVIEW C, 2012, 85 (06)