pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2511.11033 · v3 · submitted 2025-11-14 · ⚛️ nucl-ex

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

New Ground State in {}¹⁴⁹La Removes Two-Neutron-Separation-Energy Anomaly in Lanthanum Isotopes

S. Kimura , M. Wada , H. Haba , Y. Hirayama , H. Ishiyama , Y. Ito , T. Niwase , M. Rosenbusch
show 4 more authors
P. Schury H. Ueno Y.X. Watanabe Y. Yamanouchi
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-17 22:47 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ nucl-ex
keywords lanthanum isotopesnuclear mass measurementtwo-neutron separation energynuclear deformationoctupole deformationshape transitionmass spectrometry
0
0 comments X

The pith

A lighter ground state in 149La removes the two-neutron separation energy anomaly in lanthanum isotopes.

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

This paper reports a mass measurement of neutron-rich 149La that resolves conflicting prior results. The authors used simultaneous mass and lifetime detection to observe a beta-decaying state 221 keV lighter than one earlier value. They identify this state as the true ground state, bringing the mass into agreement with the other report. Removing the lighter mass eliminates the reported prominence in two-neutron separation energies for lanthanum isotopes and replaces it with a kink structure near N=91. Model comparisons link the kink to a nuclear shape change from octupole deformation.

Core claim

The peak corresponding to a beta-decaying state was observed in the time-of-flight spectra at a position of 221(6) keV/c² lighter than the reported 149La mass in one study but agrees with the other measurement. This peak is concluded to be the ground state of 149La. With this identification the previously reported distinct prominence in the two-neutron separation energies disappears, while a new kink structure similar to that in the cerium isotopes appears. Comparison with theoretical models suggests that a nuclear shape transition from octupole deformation to another type of deformation occurs around N=91.

What carries the argument

Multi-reflection time-of-flight mass spectrograph combined with a β-TOF detector for simultaneous mass-lifetime measurement that distinguishes the ground state from possible isomers.

Load-bearing premise

The observed beta-decaying peak at 221 keV lighter is the true ground state of 149La rather than a long-lived isomer, and earlier mass differences arose from systematic experimental variations.

What would settle it

An independent experiment that measures the 149La ground-state mass significantly heavier than this value or identifies an even lower-lying state with inconsistent decay properties would falsify the ground-state assignment.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.11033 by H. Haba, H. Ishiyama, H. Ueno, M. Rosenbusch, M. Wada, P. Schury, S. Kimura, T. Niwase, Y. Hirayama, Y. Ito, Y.X. Watanabe, Y. Yamanouchi.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. The measured mass excess values of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (a) TOF spectrum of the singly-charged [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. (a) Two-neutron separation energies of the barium, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Nuclear mass is a key indicator of how the nuclear shell structure evolves. The recent mass measurement study of neutron-rich lanthanum isotopes [A. Jaries, $et~al$., Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 134}, 042501(2025)] reveals the presence of a distinct prominence in their two-neutron separation energies. However, its presence has been called into question based on the results of another mass determination [B. Liu, Ph.D. thesis, University of Notre Dame (2025)]. In this letter, we report an effort to clarify these contradictory results through the use of the simultaneous mass-lifetime measurement of the neutron-rich lanthanum isotope ${}^{149}$La using a multi-reflection time-of-flight mass spectrograph combined with a $\beta$-TOF detector. The peak corresponding to a $\beta$-decaying state was observed in the time-of-flight spectra at a position of $221(6)~{\rm keV/c^2}$ lighter than the reported ${}^{149}$La mass in A. Jaries, $et~al$., but our measured result is in excellent agreement with the mass value reported in B. Liu. We have concluded that this peak is the ground state of ${}^{149}$La. With this, the previously reported distinct prominence in the two-neutron separation energies disappears, while a new kink structure, similar to that in the cerium isotopes, appears. Comparison with theoretical models suggests that a nuclear shape transition from octupole deformation to another type of deformation occurs around $N=91$ and is likely the cause of this kink structure.

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 reports a new mass measurement of neutron-rich 149La using a multi-reflection time-of-flight mass spectrograph combined with a β-TOF detector. A β-decaying peak is observed at a position 221(6) keV/c² lighter than the value from Jaries et al. (Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 042501, 2025), in agreement with the mass from Liu's 2025 thesis. The authors conclude this peak is the ground state of 149La, which removes the reported prominence in two-neutron separation energies for La isotopes and instead reveals a new kink structure around N=91, interpreted as a nuclear shape transition from octupole deformation.

Significance. If the ground-state assignment holds, the result resolves a recent discrepancy between two mass measurements of 149La and clarifies the evolution of shell structure and deformation in the neutron-rich lanthanum region. The appearance of a kink similar to that in cerium isotopes provides new experimental input on shape transitions near N=91, with potential implications for nuclear models of octupole and other deformations. The simultaneous mass-lifetime technique is a methodological strength that directly ties the observed state to β decay.

major comments (2)
  1. [Results section describing the TOF peak and ground-state conclusion] The central claim that the observed β-decaying TOF peak is the ground state (rather than a long-lived isomer) rests on its mass agreement with the Liu thesis and the fact that it is β-decaying. However, the manuscript provides no explicit excitation-energy upper limits, gamma-ray coincidence data, or decay-scheme constraints demonstrating the absence of a lower-lying state. This assignment is load-bearing for the conclusion that the S2n prominence disappears and a new kink appears.
  2. [Discussion and comparison with theoretical models] The interpretation of the new kink in S2n as evidence for a shape transition from octupole deformation around N=91 is presented qualitatively. The manuscript should specify which theoretical models were compared, their key parameters, and quantitative measures of agreement (e.g., rms deviations or predicted vs. observed kink positions) to support the claim.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Experimental method and data analysis] The abstract states the peak is '221(6) keV/c² lighter' but the full uncertainty budget (statistical vs. systematic contributions from TOF calibration, magnetic field stability, and isomer discrimination) is not detailed in the visible text; this should be expanded for reproducibility.
  2. [Figures and captions] Figure captions for the TOF spectra should explicitly label the reference ions used for calibration and indicate the time window for β coincidence to aid reader assessment of background and peak fitting.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful and constructive review. We appreciate the recognition of the significance of our mass measurement in resolving the discrepancy for 149La and clarifying the S2n behavior near N=91. We address the major comments point by point below, indicating the revisions we will make to strengthen the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Results section describing the TOF peak and ground-state conclusion] The central claim that the observed β-decaying TOF peak is the ground state (rather than a long-lived isomer) rests on its mass agreement with the Liu thesis and the fact that it is β-decaying. However, the manuscript provides no explicit excitation-energy upper limits, gamma-ray coincidence data, or decay-scheme constraints demonstrating the absence of a lower-lying state. This assignment is load-bearing for the conclusion that the S2n prominence disappears and a new kink appears.

    Authors: We agree that a clearer justification of the ground-state assignment is warranted. The conclusion rests on the single β-decaying TOF peak appearing 221(6) keV/c² below the Jaries et al. value and in agreement with the independent Liu thesis result, with no additional lower-mass peaks observed in the β-gated spectra. While gamma-ray coincidence data were not collected in this mass-spectroscopy experiment, the simultaneous mass-lifetime technique directly associates the observed state with β decay. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated paragraph in the Results section that discusses the isomer possibility, notes the non-observation of any lower-lying state within the achieved mass resolution, and provides an implied upper limit on excitation energy derived from that resolution and the absence of other peaks. This constitutes a partial revision focused on improved presentation rather than new data. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Discussion and comparison with theoretical models] The interpretation of the new kink in S2n as evidence for a shape transition from octupole deformation around N=91 is presented qualitatively. The manuscript should specify which theoretical models were compared, their key parameters, and quantitative measures of agreement (e.g., rms deviations or predicted vs. observed kink positions) to support the claim.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this recommendation. The current Discussion compares the experimental S2n trend with theoretical calculations that incorporate octupole degrees of freedom and shows that the kink near N=91 is consistent with a transition away from octupole deformation. To make this more rigorous, we will revise the Discussion to name the specific models employed, list the relevant parameters (including the octupole deformation strength), and add quantitative metrics such as the rms deviation between measured and calculated S2n values in the N=88–94 region together with the predicted versus observed kink position. These additions will be included in the next version of the manuscript. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: direct experimental mass measurement with independent evidence

full rationale

This is a direct experimental report of a multi-reflection time-of-flight mass measurement combined with beta coincidence detection. The central claim—that the observed beta-decaying peak at 221(6) keV/c² below the Jaries value is the 149La ground state—rests on the measured TOF position agreeing with the independent Liu thesis mass value and on the beta-decay signature. No equations, fitted parameters, or derivations are presented; the result does not reduce to any self-referential definition, renamed empirical pattern, or self-citation chain. The paper is self-contained against external benchmarks (prior mass values) and contains no load-bearing theoretical steps that could exhibit circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The result relies on standard nuclear experimental assumptions about ion identification, time-of-flight calibration, and beta-decay tagging; no free parameters are fitted to produce the central mass value, and no new entities are postulated.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard assumptions in multi-reflection time-of-flight mass spectrometry for ion identification and calibration hold.
    The mass offset is extracted from TOF peak positions whose absolute scale depends on established calibration procedures.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5662 in / 1250 out tokens · 32865 ms · 2026-05-17T22:47:31.723423+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

  • IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/RealityFromDistinction.lean reality_from_one_distinction unclear
    ?
    unclear

    Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

    The peak corresponding to a β-decaying state was observed ... at a position of 221(6) keV/c² lighter than the reported 149La mass ... We have concluded that this peak is the ground state of 149La. With this, the previously reported distinct prominence in the two-neutron separation energies disappears, while a new kink structure ... appears.

  • IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear
    ?
    unclear

    Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

    Comparison with theoretical models suggests that a nuclear shape transition from octupole deformation to another type of deformation occurs around N=91

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 56 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    New Ground State in ${}^{149}$La Removes Two-Neutron-Separation-Energy Anomaly in Lanthanum Isotopes

    (hereafter denoted as “JYFL”); this study reveals the presence of a prominent bump in theS 2n plot of the neutron-rich lanthanum isotope series. The authors claimed that this prominence is unlike that in the cerium isotope series, and the evolution inS 2n fromN= 94 to 95 is the strongest change in the chart of nuclides in the region away from shell closur...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  2. [2]

    Lunney, J

    D. Lunney, J. M. Pearson, and C. Thibault, Rev. Mod. Phys.75, 1021 (2003)

    work page 2003

  3. [3]

    Wienholtz, D

    F. Wienholtz, D. Beck, K. Blaum, C. Borgmann, M. Breitenfeldt, R. B. Cakirli, S. George, F. Her- furth, J. D. Holt, M. Kowalska, S. Kreim, D. Lunney, 5 V. Manea, J. Men´ endez, D. Neidherr, M. Rosenbusch, L. Schweikhard, A. Schwenk, J. Simonis, J. Stanja, R. N. Wolf, and K. Zuber, Nature498, 346 (2013)

    work page 2013

  4. [4]

    A. Huck, G. Klotz, A. Knipper, C. Mieh´ e, C. Richard- Serre, G. Walter, A. Poves, H. L. Ravn, and G. Marguier, Phys. Rev. C31, 2226 (1985)

    work page 1985

  5. [5]

    Rosenbusch, P

    M. Rosenbusch, P. Ascher, D. Atanasov, C. Barbieri, D. Beck, K. Blaum, C. Borgmann, M. Breitenfeldt, R. B. Cakirli, A. Cipollone, S. George, F. Herfurth, M. Kowal- ska, S. Kreim, D. Lunney, V. Manea, P. Navr´ atil, D. Nei- dherr, L. Schweikhard, V. Som` a, J. Stanja, F. Wienholtz, R. N. Wolf, and K. Zuber, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 202501 (2015)

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    Michimasa, M

    S. Michimasa, M. Kobayashi, Y. Kiyokawa, S. Ota, D. S. Ahn, H. Baba, G. P. A. Berg, M. Dozono, N. Fukuda, T. Furuno, E. Ideguchi, N. Inabe, T. Kawabata, S. Kawase, K. Kisamori, K. Kobayashi, T. Kubo, Y. Kub- ota, C. S. Lee, M. Matsushita, H. Miya, A. Mizukami, H. Nagakura, D. Nishimura, H. Oikawa, H. Sakai, Y. Shimizu, A. Stolz, H. Suzuki, M. Takaki, H. T...

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Meisel, S

    Z. Meisel, S. George, S. Ahn, D. Bazin, B. A. Brown, J. Browne, J. F. Carpino, H. Chung, R. H. Cyburt, A. Estrad´ e, M. Famiano, A. Gade, C. Langer, M. Matoˇ s, W. Mittig, F. Montes, D. J. Morrissey, J. Pereira, H. Schatz, J. Schatz, M. Scott, D. Shapira, K. Smith, J. Stevens, W. Tan, O. Tarasov, S. Towers, K. Wimmer, J. R. Winkelbauer, J. Yurkon, and R. ...

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    Leistenschneider, E

    E. Leistenschneider, E. Dunling, G. Bollen, B. A. Brown, J. Dilling, A. Hamaker, J. D. Holt, A. Jacobs, A. A. Kwiatkowski, T. Miyagi, W. S. Porter, D. Puentes, M. Redshaw, M. P. Reiter, R. Ringle, R. Sandler, C. S. Sumithrarachchi, A. A. Valverde, and I. T. Yandow (The LEBIT Collaboration and the TITAN Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 042501 (2021)

    work page 2021

  9. [9]

    Michimasa, M

    S. Michimasa, M. Kobayashi, Y. Kiyokawa, S. Ota, R. Yokoyama, D. Nishimura, D. S. Ahn, H. Baba, G. P. A. Berg, M. Dozono, N. Fukuda, T. Furuno, E. Ideguchi, N. Inabe, T. Kawabata, S. Kawase, K. Kisamori, K. Kobayashi, T. Kubo, Y. Kubota, C. S. Lee, M. Matsushita, H. Miya, A. Mizukami, H. Na- gakura, H. Oikawa, H. Sakai, Y. Shimizu, A. Stolz, H. Suzuki, M....

    work page 2020

  10. [10]

    Iimura, M

    S. Iimura, M. Rosenbusch, A. Takamine, Y. Tsunoda, M. Wada, S. Chen, D. S. Hou, W. Xian, H. Ishiyama, S. Yan, P. Schury, H. Crawford, P. Doornenbal, Y. Hi- rayama, Y. Ito, S. Kimura, T. Koiwai, T. M. Kojima, H. Koura, J. Lee, J. Liu, S. Michimasa, H. Miyatake, J. Y. Moon, S. Naimi, S. Nishimura, T. Niwase, A. Oda- hara, T. Otsuka, S. Paschalis, M. Petri, ...

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    Rinta-Antila, S

    S. Rinta-Antila, S. Kopecky, V. S. Kolhinen, J. Hakala, J. Huikari, A. Jokinen, A. Nieminen, J. ¨Ayst¨ o, and J. Sz- erypo, Phys. Rev. C70, 011301 (2004)

    work page 2004

  12. [12]

    Hager, T

    U. Hager, T. Eronen, J. Hakala, A. Jokinen, V. S. Kol- hinen, S. Kopecky, I. Moore, A. Nieminen, M. Oinonen, S. Rinta-Antila, J. Szerypo, and J. ¨Ayst¨ o, Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 042504 (2006)

    work page 2006

  13. [13]

    Rahaman, U

    S. Rahaman, U. Hager, V.-V. Elomaa, T. Eronen, J. Hakala, A. Jokinen, A. Kankainen, P. Karvonen, I. D. Moore, H. Penttil¨ a, S. Rinta-Antila, J. Rissanen, A. Saas- tamoinen, T. Sonoda, and J. ¨Ayst¨ o, The European Phys- ical Journal A32, 87 (2007)

    work page 2007

  14. [14]

    Hager, A

    U. Hager, A. Jokinen, V.-V. Elomaa, T. Eronen, J. Hakala, A. Kankainen, S. Rahaman, J. Rissanen, I. Moore, S. Rinta-Antila, A. Saastamoinen, T. Sonoda, and J. ¨Ayst¨ o, Nuclear Physics A793, 20 (2007)

    work page 2007

  15. [15]

    V. V. Simon, T. Brunner, U. Chowdhury, B. Eberhardt, S. Ettenauer, A. T. Gallant, E. Man´ e, M. C. Simon, P. Delheij, M. R. Pearson, G. Audi, G. Gwinner, D. Lun- ney, H. Schatz, and J. Dilling, Phys. Rev. C85, 064308 (2012)

    work page 2012

  16. [16]

    Klawitter, A

    R. Klawitter, A. Bader, M. Brodeur, U. Chowdhury, A. Chaudhuri, J. Fallis, A. T. Gallant, A. Grossheim, A. A. Kwiatkowski, D. Lascar, K. G. Leach, A. Lennarz, T. D. Macdonald, J. Pearkes, S. Seeraji, M. C. Simon, V. V. Simon, B. E. Schultz, and J. Dilling, Phys. Rev. C 93, 045807 (2016)

    work page 2016

  17. [17]

    Lunney, V

    D. Lunney, V. Manea, M. Mougeot, L. Nies, N. A. Althubiti, D. Atanasov, K. Blaum, A. Herlert, W.-J. Huang, J. Karthein, I. Kulikov, Y. A. Litvinov, D. Neid- herr, T. R. Rodr´ ıguez, M. Rosenbusch, L. Schweikhard, T. Steinsberger, A. Welker, F. Wienholtz, and R. N. Wolf, Phys. Rev. C112, 034307 (2025)

    work page 2025

  18. [18]

    Van Schelt, D

    J. Van Schelt, D. Lascar, G. Savard, J. A. Clark, S. Cald- well, A. Chaudhuri, J. Fallis, J. P. Greene, A. F. Levand, G. Li, K. S. Sharma, M. G. Sternberg, T. Sun, and B. J. Zabransky, Phys. Rev. C85, 045805 (2012)

    work page 2012

  19. [19]

    Orford, N

    R. Orford, N. Vassh, J. A. Clark, G. C. McLaughlin, M. R. Mumpower, G. Savard, R. Surman, A. Apra- hamian, F. Buchinger, M. T. Burkey, D. A. Gorelov, T. Y. Hirsh, J. W. Klimes, G. E. Morgan, A. Nystrom, and K. S. Sharma, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 262702 (2018)

    work page 2018

  20. [20]

    Orford, F

    R. Orford, F. G. Kondev, G. Savard, J. A. Clark, W. S. Porter, D. Ray, F. Buchinger, M. T. Burkey, D. A. Gorelov, D. J. Hartley, J. W. Klimes, K. S. Sharma, A. A. Valverde, and X. L. Yan, Phys. Rev. C102, 011303(R) (2020)

    work page 2020

  21. [21]

    Orford, N

    R. Orford, N. Vassh, J. A. Clark, G. C. McLaugh- lin, M. R. Mumpower, D. Ray, G. Savard, R. Surman, F. Buchinger, D. P. Burdette, M. T. Burkey, D. A. Gorelov, J. W. Klimes, W. S. Porter, K. S. Sharma, A. A. Valverde, L. Varriano, and X. L. Yan, Phys. Rev. C105, L052802 (2022)

    work page 2022

  22. [22]

    Kimura, M

    S. Kimura, M. Wada, H. Haba, H. Ishiyama, S. Ishizawa, Y. Ito, T. Niwase, M. Rosenbusch, P. Schury, and A. Takamine, Phys. Rev. C110, 045810 (2024)

    work page 2024

  23. [23]

    D. Ray, N. Vassh, B. Liu, A. A. Valverde, M. Brodeur, J. A. Clark, G. C. McLaughlin, M. R. Mumpower, R. Or- ford, W. S. Porter, G. Savard, K. S. Sharma, R. Surman, F. Buchinger, D. P. Burdette, N. Callahan, A. T. Gallant, D. E. M. Hoff, K. Kolos, F. G. Kondev, G. E. Morgan, F. Rivero, D. Santiago-Gonzalez, N. D. Scielzo, L. Var- riano, C. M. Weber, G. E. ...

    work page arXiv 2024

  24. [24]

    Sp˘ ataru, G

    A. Sp˘ ataru, G. Kripk´ o-Koncz, T. Dickel, C. Hornung, W. R. Plaß, P. Constantin, D. Amanbayev, S. Ayet San Andr´ es, D. L. Balabanski, S. Beck, J. Bergmann, H. Geissel, N. Kalantar-Nayestanaki, J. Kehat, I. Mar- dor, N. Minkov, A. Mollaebrahimi, C. Scheidenberger, M. Wasserheß, H. Wilsenach, and J. Zhao, Phys. Rev. C 6 111, 054307 (2025)

    work page 2025

  25. [25]

    P. A. Butler, Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics43, 073002 (2016)

    work page 2016

  26. [26]

    Jaries, M

    A. Jaries, M. Stryjczyk, A. Kankainen, T. Eronen, O. Be- liuskina, T. Dickel, M. Flayol, Z. Ge, M. Hukkanen, M. Mougeot, S. Nikas, I. Pohjalainen, A. Raggio, M. Re- ponen, J. Ruotsalainen, and V. Virtanen, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 042501 (2025)

    work page 2025

  27. [27]

    Liu, Ph.D

    B. Liu, Ph.D. thesis, University of Notre Dame (2025)

    work page 2025

  28. [28]

    Kimura, M

    S. Kimura, M. Wada, H. Haba, H. Ishiyama, T. Niwase, M. Rosenbusch, and P. Schury, Anomalous nuclear effects on ion charge state distribution in helium gas (2025), arXiv:2501.09364

    work page arXiv 2025

  29. [29]

    ¨Ayst¨ o, Nuclear Physics A693, 477 (2001)

    J. ¨Ayst¨ o, Nuclear Physics A693, 477 (2001)

    work page 2001

  30. [30]

    Savard, S

    G. Savard, S. Baker, C. Davids, A. Levand, E. Moore, R. Pardo, R. Vondrasek, B. Zabransky, and G. Zinkann, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms 266, 4086 (2008)

    work page 2008

  31. [31]

    Niwase, M

    T. Niwase, M. Wada, P. Schury, H. Haba, S. Ishizawa, Y. Ito, D. Kaji, S. Kimura, H. Miyatake, K. Morimoto, K. Morita, M. Rosenbusch, H. Wollnik, T. Shanley, and Y. Benari, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detec- tors and Associated Equipment953, 163198 (2020)

    work page 2020

  32. [32]

    Niwase, W

    T. Niwase, W. Xian, M. Wada, M. Rosenbusch, S. Chen, A. Takamine, J. Liu, S. Iimura, D. Hou, S. Yan, H. Ishiyama, H. Miyatake, S. Nishimura, D. Kaji, K. Mo- rimoto, Y. Hirayama, Y. X. Watanabe, S. Kimura, P. Schury, and H. Wollnik, Progress of Theoretical and Experimental Physics2023, 031H01 (2023)

    work page 2023

  33. [33]

    Schury, T

    P. Schury, T. Niwase, M. Wada, P. Brionnet, S. Chen, T. Hashimoto, H. Haba, Y. Hirayama, D. S. Hou, S. Iimura, H. Ishiyama, S. Ishizawa, Y. Ito, D. Kaji, S. Kimura, H. Koura, J. J. Liu, H. Miyatake, J.-Y. Moon, K. Morimoto, K. Morita, D. Nagae, M. Rosenbusch, A. Takamine, Y. X. Watanabe, H. Wollnik, W. Xian, and S. X. Yan, Phys. Rev. C104, L021304 (2021)

    work page 2021

  34. [34]

    Niwase, M

    T. Niwase, M. Wada, P. Schury, P. Brionnet, S. D. Chen, T. Hashimoto, H. Haba, Y. Hirayama, D. S. Hou, S. Iimura, H. Ishiyama, S. Ishizawa, Y. Ito, D. Kaji, S. Kimura, J. Liu, H. Miyatake, J. Y. Moon, K. Morimoto, K. Morita, D. Nagae, M. Rosenbusch, A. Takamine, T. Tanaka, Y. X. Watanabe, H. Woll- nik, W. Xian, and S. X. Yan, Phys. Rev. C104, 044617 (2021)

    work page 2021

  35. [35]

    Schury, M

    P. Schury, M. Wada, Y. Ito, F. Arai, S. Naimi, T. Sonoda, H. Wollnik, V. Shchepunov, C. Smorra, and C. Yuan, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms 335, 39 (2014)

    work page 2014

  36. [36]

    Kimura, M

    S. Kimura, M. Wada, H. Haba, S. Ishizawa, T. Niwase, M. Rosenbusch, and P. Schury, RIKEN Accel. Prog. Rep. 57, 8 (2024)

    work page 2024

  37. [37]

    Y. Ito, P. Schury, M. Wada, S. Naimi, T. Sonoda, H. Mita, F. Arai, A. Takamine, K. Okada, A. Ozawa, and H. Wollnik, Phys. Rev. C88, 011306(R) (2013)

    work page 2013

  38. [38]

    Kimura, Y

    S. Kimura, Y. Ito, D. Kaji, P. Schury, M. Wada, H. Haba, T. Hashimoto, Y. Hirayama, M. MacCormick, H. Miy- atake, J. Y. Moon, K. Morimoto, M. Mukai, I. Mur- ray, A. Ozawa, M. Rosenbusch, H. Schatz, A. Takamine, T. Tanaka, Y. X. Watanabe, and H. Wollnik, High pre- cision mass measurements of intermediate-mass neutron- deficient nuclei via mrtof-ms, inProce...

    work page 2021

  39. [39]

    Evaluated Nuclear Structure Data File

    work page

  40. [40]

    Engler, Y

    G. Engler, Y. Nir-El, M. Shmid, and S. Amiel, Phys. Rev. C19, 1948 (1979)

    work page 1948

  41. [41]

    R. A. Warner and P. L. Reeder, Radiation Effects94, 27 (1986)

    work page 1986

  42. [42]

    P. L. Reeder, R. A. Warner, M. D. Edmiston, R. L. Gill, and A. Piotrowski, New delayed-neutron precursors from tristan (American Chemical Society, 1986) pp. 171–176, 0

    work page 1986

  43. [43]

    Rudstam, K

    G. Rudstam, K. Aleklett, and L. Sihver, Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables53, 1 (1993)

    work page 1993

  44. [44]

    J. Wu, S. Nishimura, G. Lorusso, P. M¨ oller, E. Ideguchi, P.-H. Regan, G. S. Simpson, P.-A. S¨ oderstr¨ om, P. M. Walker, H. Watanabe, Z. Y. Xu, H. Baba, F. Browne, R. Daido, P. Doornenbal, Y. F. Fang, N. Fukuda, G. Gey, T. Isobe, Z. Korkulu, P. S. Lee, J. J. Liu, Z. Li, Z. Patel, V. Phong, S. Rice, H. Sakurai, L. Sin- clair, T. Sumikama, M. Tanaka, A. Y...

    work page 2017

  45. [45]

    Agostinelliet al., Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment506, 250 (2003)

    S. Agostinelliet al., Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment506, 250 (2003)

    work page 2003

  46. [46]

    M¨ oller, A

    P. M¨ oller, A. Sierk, T. Ichikawa, and H. Sagawa, Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables109-110, 1 (2016)

    work page 2016

  47. [47]

    Koura, T

    H. Koura, T. Tachibana, M. Uno, and M. Ya- mada, Progress of Theoretical Physics113, 305 (2005), https://academic.oup.com/ptp/article- pdf/113/2/305/5192381/113-2-305.pdf

    work page 2005

  48. [48]

    Goriely, N

    S. Goriely, N. Chamel, and J. M. Pearson, Phys. Rev. C 88, 024308 (2013)

    work page 2013

  49. [49]

    N. Wang, M. Liu, X. Wu, and J. Meng, Physics Letters B734, 215 (2014)

    work page 2014

  50. [50]

    Duflo and A

    J. Duflo and A. Zuker, Phys. Rev. C52, R23 (1995)

    work page 1995

  51. [51]

    Z. M. Niu and H. Z. Liang, Phys. Rev. C106, L021303 (2022)

    work page 2022

  52. [52]

    Urban, W

    W. Urban, W. R. Phillips, J. L. Durell, M. A. Jones, M. Leddy, C. J. Pearson, A. G. Smith, B. J. Varley, I. Ahmad, L. R. Morss, M. Bentaleb, E. Lubkiewicz, and N. Schulz, Phys. Rev. C54, 945 (1996)

    work page 1996

  53. [53]

    Lic˘ a, G

    R. Lic˘ a, G. Benzoni, T. R. Rodr´ ıguez, M. J. G. Borge, L. M. Fraile, H. Mach, A. I. Morales, M. Madurga, C. O. Sotty, V. Vedia, H. De Witte, J. Benito, R. N. Bernard, T. Berry, A. Bracco, F. Camera, S. Ceruti, V. Charviakova, N. Cieplicka-Ory´ nczak, C. Costache, F. C. L. Crespi, J. Creswell, G. Fernandez-Mart´ ınez, H. Fynbo, P. T. Greenlees, I. Homm,...

    work page 2018

  54. [54]

    Syntfeld, H

    A. Syntfeld, H. Mach, W. P l´ ociennik, W. Kurcewicz, and B. Fogelberg, The European Physical Journal A - Hadrons and Nuclei20, 359 (2004)

    work page 2004

  55. [55]

    Urban, T

    W. Urban, T. Rza ¸ ca-Urban, A. Syntfeld-Ka˙ zuch, J. L. Durell, A. G. Smith, B. J. Varley, and I. Ahmad, Phys. Rev. C76, 037301 (2007)

    work page 2007

  56. [56]

    Syntfeld, H

    A. Syntfeld, H. Mach, R. Kaczarowski, W. Kurcewicz, W. P l´ ociennik, W. Urban, B. Fogelberg, and P. Hoff, Nuclear Physics A710, 221 (2002). SUPPLEMENT AL MA TERIALS The measured square of the TOF ratioρ 2 of each mea- surement is tabulated in Table II. 8 TABLE II. Measured square of time-of-flight ratioρ 2 and the extracted mass excess values ME. The ion...

    work page 2002