Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 42 references

Excitation Spectra of the ${}^{12}{\rm C}(p,d)$ Reaction near the $\eta'$-Meson Emission Threshold Measured in Coincidence with High-Momentum Protons

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · 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 the first direct detection of $\eta'$-mesic nuclei, with the $^{12}{\rm C}(p,d)$ spectrum showing two bound-state peaks below the $\eta'$ emission threshold.

desk verdict A genuinely new coincidence measurement with an honest analysis, but the 2.1σ global significance and unbenchmarked theoretical template make 'first direct detection' a stretch. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.07824 v1 pith:T7CPXIP5 submitted 2025-09-09 nucl-ex nucl-th

R. Sekiya , K. Itahashi , Y. K. Tanaka , S. Hirenzaki , N. Ikeno , V. Metag , M. Nanova , J. Yamagata-Sekihara
show 69 more authors
V. Drozd H. Ekawa H. Geissel E. Haettner A. Kasagi E. Liu M. Nakagawa S. Purushothaman C. Rappold T. R. Saito H. Alibrahim Alfaki F. Amjad M. Armstrong K.-H. Behr J. Benlliure Z. Brencic T. Dickel S. Dubey S. Escrig M. Feijoo-Fontán H. Fujioka Y. Gao F. Goldenbaum A. Graña González M. N. Harakeh Y. He H. Heggen C. Hornung N. Hubbard M. Iwasaki N. Kalantar-Nayestanaki M. Kavatsyuk E. Kazantseva A. Khreptak B. Kindler H. Kollmus D. Kostyleva S. Kraft-Bermuth N. Kurz B. Lommel S. Minami D. J. Morrissey P. Moskal I. Mukha C. Nociforo H. J. Ong S. Pietri E. Rocco J. L. Rodríguez-Sánchez P. Roy R. Ruber S. Schadmand C. Scheidenberger P. Schwarz V. Serdyuk M. Skurzok B. Streicher K. Suzuki B. Szczepanczyk X. Tang N. Tortorelli M. Vencelj T. Weber H. Weick M. Will K. Wimmer A. Yamamoto A. Yanai J. Zhao
This is my paper · ORCID
classification nucl-exnucl-th
keywords eta-primemesicnucleimissing-massspectroscopytwo-nucleonabsorptionopticalpotentialboundstateschiralsymmetryrestorationcarbon-11coincidencetagging
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 tries to establish that the $\eta'$ meson, an unusually heavy partner of the pion whose mass is tied to chiral symmetry breaking in quantum chromodynamics, can be bound inside a nucleus, forming an $\eta'$-mesic nucleus (a nucleus in which the $\eta'$ is held by the strong force). The authors measure the excitation energy left in the residual nucleus by the $^{12}{\rm C}(p,d)$ reaction near the $\eta'$ emission threshold, and they require a high-momentum proton emitted backward, a tag for the two-nucleon absorption decay (in which the $\eta'$ is absorbed by a pair of nucleons). In the resulting spectrum they see two structures below threshold, at about $-30$ and $-6$ MeV, which fit the expected $1s$ and $2p$ bound states. The fit gives an attractive real optical-potential depth of about $-61$ MeV and a small absorptive part, and the authors conclude that this is the first direct detection of $\eta'$-mesic nuclei. If the claim holds, this would be the first meson-nucleus bound state held solely by the strong interaction, and a direct handle on how the $\eta'$ mass changes in dense nuclear matter.

What carries the argument

The central object is the semi-exclusive missing-mass spectrum of the $^{12}{\rm C}(p,d)$ reaction, in which the forward deuteron's momentum is measured with a high-resolution spectrometer and the decay is tagged by detecting a $\sim1$ GeV/$c$ proton in the backward hemisphere. The signal shape is taken from Green's-function calculations of the two-nucleon absorption channel of $\eta'$-mesic nuclei [1,25], and the fit uses $f_{\rm sig}=\mu \bar{N}_p\,\omega_{\rm WASA}\,f_\sigma(V_0,W_0)$ plus a third-order polynomial pedestal for the quasi-free background. This lets a single optical-potential pair $(V_0,W_0)$ predict both the bound-state peak positions and their relative strengths, which is what converts two small peaks into a potential-depth measurement.

What would settle it

A higher-statistics run over a wider excitation-energy range, extending below $E_{\rm ex}-E_0\simeq-70$ MeV, should show the same two bound-state peaks growing on the predicted signal shape; if they do not appear, or if the apparent peak positions move by more than the $\sim1.6$ MeV resolution when the pedestal form or the $W_1/W_2$ partition is varied, the mesic-nucleus assignment is falsified. A second check is to look for the predicted back-to-back correlated two-nucleon pairs from the absorption decay; their absence would contradict the signal interpretation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that the $\eta'$ meson forms bound states with a carbon nucleus. In the semi-exclusive $^{12}{\rm C}(p,d)$ reaction, with events selected by a high-momentum proton emitted into the backward hemisphere, the measured missing-mass spectrum—the excitation energy of the residual system inferred from the deuteron momentum—shows two structures below the $\eta'$ emission threshold, at $E_{\rm ex}-E_0\simeq-30$ and $-6$ MeV. Fitting these structures with theoretical spectra computed for an optical potential (a complex potential describing scattering and absorption in nuclear matter) $U(r)=(V_0+iW_1)\rho(r)/\rho(0)+iW_2(\rho(r)/\rho(0))^2$, with $W_1=W_2=W_0/2$, yields a real potential depth $V_0=-61\pm1\,({\rm stat})\pm5\,({\rm syst})$ MeV and an upper limit $|W_0|\lesssim10$ MeV at 68% confidence. The authors assign the two peaks to the $1s$ and $2p$ orbitals of the $\eta'$-$^{11}{\rm C}$ system and interpret the result as the first direct detection of $\eta'$-mesic nuclei, implying an $\eta'$ mass reduction of about $61$ MeV/$c^2$ at nuclear saturation density. The statistical significance is limited: $3.5\sigma$ locally and, after the look-elsewhere penalty for scanning the potential grid, $2.1\sigma$ globally.

Load-bearing premise

The extraction depends on the theoretical signal spectrum for the two-nucleon absorption channel being correct in shape and normalization; if that template is inaccurate, the fitted $V_0$, the bound-state orbital assignment, and the reported mass shift do not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the assignment is correct, the $\eta'$ mass is lowered by about $61$ MeV/$c^2$ at nuclear saturation density, directly probing partial restoration of chiral symmetry in dense matter.
  • The small absorptive part, $|W_0|\lesssim10$ MeV, means $\eta'$-mesic nuclei are narrow enough to be observable, a necessary condition for any meson-nucleus bound state.
  • A level spacing of about $24$ MeV between the two peaks matches the predicted $1s$--$2p$ splitting of the $\eta'$-$^{11}{\rm C}$ system.
  • The coincidence-tagging method reduces the quasi-free background by a factor of roughly 100 and provides a template for future searches of other mesic nuclei.
  • The extracted $V_0$ is consistent with earlier photoproduction constraints and with model predictions in the $-80$ to $-37$ MeV range, while disfavoring much deeper potentials.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the effect is real, the absolute scale of the signal cross section becomes the main systematic driver: the fitted normalization $\mu=1.43\pm0.42$ absorbs current uncertainty in the elementary $\eta'$ production cross section, so a dedicated measurement of the $n(p,d)\eta'$ reaction would sharpen $V_0$ considerably.
  • The same backward-proton tag could be applied to $\eta$-mesic nuclei or kaonic states; where the absorption mechanism differs, the predicted proton energy-angle correlation would provide a discriminating test.
  • Taken at face value, the reported local and global significances ($3.5\sigma$, $2.1\sigma$) leave room for the two peaks to be statistical fluctuations; increasing the statistics or observing the predicted back-to-back nucleon pairs would test that directly.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

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. The paper reports a semi-exclusive measurement of the 12C(p,d) reaction near the eta-prime emission threshold at GSI, selecting high-momentum backward protons in WASA. The measured spectrum shows two structures below the threshold. Fitting the spectrum with theoretical signal spectra from Refs. [1,25] and a third-order polynomial pedestal yields a real optical potential depth V0 = -61 +/- 1 (stat) +/- 5 (syst) MeV and an upper limit |W0| < 10 MeV, with a local significance of 3.5 sigma and a global significance of 2.1 sigma after the look-elsewhere correction. The authors conclude that this is the first direct detection of eta-prime-mesic nuclei. The analysis includes sideband controls, Monte Carlo p-values, a look-elsewhere correction, and systematic checks, but the global significance is limited and the signal extraction depends on an unvalidated theoretical template.

Significance. If correct, this measurement would provide the first direct evidence for eta-prime-mesic nuclei and a new constraint on the in-medium eta-prime mass, with implications for chiral symmetry restoration. The statistical treatment is careful: sideband spectra are used as controls, p-values are obtained from Monte Carlo simulations, the look-elsewhere effect is evaluated, and systematic uncertainties from calibration, resolution, and pedestal choice are considered. The result is consistent with photoproduction constraints and with QMC model calculations. However, the global significance of 2.1 sigma is too weak for a discovery claim, and the extracted potential and orbital assignment rely on theoretical signal shapes that are not independently validated. These issues do not invalidate the measurement but make the headline conclusion disproportionate to the evidence.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Conclusions] The central claim that this is the 'first direct detection of eta'-mesic nuclei' is not supported by the statistical significance reported in the paper: the abstract states a local significance of 3.5 sigma and a global significance of 2.1 sigma after the look-elsewhere effect, and the text near Fig. 4 quotes a global p-value of 1.7e-2. A 2.1 sigma global significance is conventionally regarded as weak evidence, not a discovery. The manuscript should either soften the conclusion to an 'indication' or present additional corroborating evidence; as written, the headline claim is disproportionate to the reported statistics.
  2. [Fit procedure (paragraph beginning 'The possible formation...')] The signal template f_sigma(V0,W0) is taken from theory papers that share authors with the present work (Refs. [1,25]) and is not independently validated. Because the scale mu = 1.43 +/- 0.42 is a free fit parameter, the normalization cannot test the template; only the shape of f_sigma determines the positions and relative strengths of the two structures assigned to the 1s and 2p orbitals. The statement that 'the expected spectral shapes barely change for different assumptions of W1/W2 ratios' is not accompanied by a quantitative comparison, and no benchmark against an independent theoretical calculation or a second reaction channel is provided. If the template is inaccurate, the extracted V0 = -61 +/- 1 +/- 5 MeV and the orbital assignment are not reliable.
  3. [Fit procedure and systematic checks] The pedestal is modeled as a third-order polynomial in E_ex, and the systematic uncertainty of +/- 5 MeV on V0 is said to come partly from 'alternative choices of the pedestal functions,' but the manuscript does not specify which alternatives were tested or what shifts they produced. Since the claimed signal sits on this pedestal and the global significance is only 2.1 sigma, a detailed quantitative account of the pedestal-systematic check is needed to support the quoted uncertainty and the robustness of the signal.
  4. [Supplemental Material (sideband spectra)] The sideband spectra provide a useful control that the structures are specific to the high-momentum proton selection, but they do not test the shape of the signal template itself. The reported global p-values of about 0.9, 0.9, and 0.3 for the C_beta, C_gamma, and C_delta sidebands show no signal, yet they also do not exclude a signal contribution at the 2 sigma level. The claim of eta-prime-mesic nuclei formation therefore rests entirely on the combination of the theoretical template and the 2.1 sigma global significance; the sidebands cannot break this degeneracy.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 2 and text] The cut labels C_alpha, C_beta, C_gamma, and C_delta appear in Fig. 2 and are used in the text without explicit definitions; define them in the text for readers.
  2. [Abstract and Introduction] There are typesetting artifacts such as 'theeta-prime-11C' and 'theetaproblem'; these should be corrected to 'the eta-prime-11C' and 'the eta problem'.
  3. [References] Ref. [25] is an arXiv preprint; if a peer-reviewed version exists, it should be cited.
  4. [Fig. 3] The ordinate label in Fig. 3 is split over multiple lines and is hard to read; consider a single-line label.
  5. [Abstract and Conclusions] The phrase 'statistical significance is limited' in the abstract is in tension with the conclusion's 'first direct detection'; the wording should be aligned to reflect the actual significance.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the result is a standard template fit to new data, with the theoretical signal shape from prior work used as input rather than derived from the measurement.

full rationale

The derivation chain is a conventional parameter-extraction fit: the measured Cα-tagged excitation spectrum is fitted by the sum of a resolution-folded theoretical signal f_sig(V0,W0) and a third-order polynomial pedestal, with a free scale parameter μ. The extracted quantities V0, W0, and μ are parameters of the fit, not outputs that were already contained in the fitted template. The signal shapes are taken from Refs. [1,25], which are prior publications by overlapping authors, but those spectra were not derived from the present data; they are theoretical predictions computed before or independently of this measurement. The paper explicitly treats μ as a fitted scale and afterwards checks that it is consistent with unity, which is a post-fit consistency check rather than a disguised prediction. The sideband spectra (Cβ, Cγ, Cδ) provide an internal control that the observed structures are specific to the high-momentum proton tag, and the extracted V0 = -61 MeV is compared with external photoproduction results (Refs. [12-16]). The remaining concern—that the orbital assignment and the value of V0 depend on the accuracy of the unbenchmarked theoretical template—is a model-dependence or correctness issue, not a circularity in the paper's argument. No equation in the paper reduces the claimed result to its own inputs by construction, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. Therefore the circularity score is low.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the theoretical signal template, a fitted normalization, and a smooth polynomial background, plus the calibration of the excitation-energy scale. V0 and W0 are extracted from the data rather than predicted from first principles. No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • V0 (real optical potential depth) = -61 ± 1 (stat) ± 5 (syst) MeV; grid best -62 MeV
    Scanned on a 2 MeV grid and fitted to the measured excitation spectrum; the final value is interpolated around the best-fit point B (-62, -2) MeV.
  • W0 (imaginary optical potential depth) = Upper limit |W0| < 10 MeV (68% C.L.); grid best -2 MeV
    Scanned on grid together with V0; absorption strength constrained by the spectrum shape.
  • mu (signal scale factor) = 1.43 ± 0.42
    Scale factor multiplying the theoretical signal spectrum; fitted freely with constraint mu >= 0. Its consistency with unity is used to reject potential parameter set C.
  • Pedestal polynomial coefficients = Not reported individually
    Coefficients of the third-order polynomial pedestal f_ped, fitted freely in each (V0,W0) fit.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The eta-prime-nucleus optical potential has the form U(r) = (V0 + iW1) rho(r)/rho(0) + iW2 (rho(r)/rho(0))^2, with W1 = W2 = W0/2.
    Used to compute f_sigma; the W1/W2 decomposition is an assumption, though the paper argues spectral shapes barely depend on it.
  • domain assumption The Green's function formation spectra and two-nucleon absorption branching ratio from Refs [1,24,25] describe the signal.
    The signal template f_sigma is taken from earlier theoretical work by partly the same collaboration; no independent experimental benchmark for the absolute shape is given.
  • domain assumption The number of detectable backward protons Nbar_p = 0.342 and the WASA efficiency omega_WASA = 0.561, from JAM transport and Geant4 simulations, are correct.
    These factors set the normalization of the signal; mu is fitted to absorb residual uncertainty.
  • domain assumption Background processes do not produce high-momentum backward protons; the sideband control spectra are smooth.
    This is the basis of the tagging method; supported by JAM/GiBUU simulations and by the sideband spectra in the Supplemental Material, but not proven.
  • domain assumption The smooth background can be described by a third-order polynomial in E_ex over the fit range [-60,40] MeV.
    The polynomial pedestal is used for both inclusive and semi-exclusive spectra; alternative functional forms were tested as a systematic check.
  • domain assumption The excitation-energy scale and resolution are correctly calibrated via D(p,d)p elastic scattering, with calibration accuracy 2.5 MeV and sigma_ex = 1.6 ± 0.1 MeV.
    The identification of the two structures depends on the absolute E_ex scale; systematic uncertainty from this is included in the quoted ± 5 MeV.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Excitation Spectra of the ${}^{12}{\rm C}(p,d)$ Reaction near the $\eta'$-Meson Emission Threshold Measured in Coincidence with High-Momentum Protons." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/T7CPXIP5

@misc{pith2026250907824,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Excitation Spectra of the $^12\rm C(p,d)$ Reaction near the $\eta'$-Meson Emission Threshold Measured in Coincidence with High-Momentum Protons},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/T7CPXIP5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.07824}
}
abstract

The missing mass of the ${}^{12}{\rm C}(p,d)$ reaction has been measured near the $\eta'$-meson emission threshold in coincidence with a high-momentum proton to selectively collect $\eta'$-${}^{11}{\rm C}$ mesic nucleus formation events at GSI, Germany. A 2.5 GeV proton excites a carbon nucleus to form an $\eta'$-mesic nucleus emitting a deuteron forward with an energy of $\sim 1.6$ GeV. The deuteron is momentum-analyzed by the Fragment Separator used as a high-resolution spectrometer to deduce the excitation energy of the residual system. The large-acceptance detector WASA surrounding the target identifies high-momentum protons emitted in the decay of the $\eta'$-mesic nucleus. The measured semi-exclusive spectrum exhibits structures below the threshold though the statistical significance is limited. The spectrum is fitted by theoretically calculated spectra varying optical-potential parameters of the $\eta'$-nucleus interaction. The analysis results indicate $\eta'$-mesic nuclei formation for the real potential depth of $\sim -61$ MeV with a local statistical significance of $3.5 \sigma$ and, taking into account the look-elsewhere effect, a global significance of $2.1 \sigma$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.07824 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematic setup of a) FRS and b) WASA. WASA [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. shows the excitation spectrum with the Cα cut in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. Local [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    This work is partly supported by JSPS Grants- in-Aid for Scientific Research (A) (No

    The authors thank the staffs of FZJ and GSI for transport, installation, and operation of WASA and FRS. This work is partly supported by JSPS Grants- in-Aid for Scientific Research (A) (No. JP24H00238), (B) (No. JP18H01242) and for Early-Career Scientists (No. JP20K14499), JSPS Fund for the Promotion of Joint International Research (Fostering Joint Intern...

    work page 2020

  2. [25]

    Nagahiro, S

    H. Nagahiro, S. Hirenzaki, E. Oset, and A. Ramos, Phys. Lett. B709, 87 (2012)

    work page 2012

  3. [2]

    Nagahiro, D

    H. Nagahiro, D. Jido, H. Fujioka, K. Itahashi, and S. Hirenzaki, Phys. Rev. C87, 045201 (2013)

    work page 2013

  4. [3]

    S. D. Bass, V. Metag, and P. Moskal, Theηandη ′ nu- cleus interactions and the search forη,η ′-mesic states, in Handbook of Nuclear Physics, edited by I. Tanihata, H. Toki, and T. Kajino (Springer Nature Singapore, Singa- pore, 2020) pp. 1–28

    work page 2020

  5. [4]

    Nambu, Phys

    Y. Nambu, Phys. Rev.117, 648 (1960)

    1960

  6. [5]

    Weinberg, Phys

    S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. D11, 3583 (1975)

    work page 1975

  7. [6]

    Witten, Nucl

    E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B156, 269 (1979). 6

    work page 1979

  8. [7]

    Nishiet al., Nature Phys.19, 788 (2023)

    T. Nishiet al., Nature Phys.19, 788 (2023)

    work page 2023

Show all 42 references
  1. [8]

    Costa, M

    P. Costa, M. C. Ruivo, C. A. de Sousa, and Yu. L. Kali- novsky, Phys. Rev. D71, 116002 (2005)

    2005

  2. [9]

    Nagahiro, M

    H. Nagahiro, M. Takizawa, and S. Hirenzaki, Phys. Rev. C74, 045203 (2006)

    2006

  3. [10]

    Sakai and D

    S. Sakai and D. Jido, Phys. Rev. C88, 064906 (2013)

    2013

  4. [11]

    S. D. Bass and A. W. Thomas, Phys. Lett. B634, 368 (2006)

    2006

  5. [12]

    J. J. Cobos-Mart´ ınez and K. Tsushima, Phys. Rev. C 109, 025202 (2024)

    2024

  6. [13]

    Nanovaet al., Phys

    M. Nanovaet al., Phys. Lett. B727, 417 (2013)

    2013

  7. [14]

    Nanovaet al., Phys

    M. Nanovaet al., Phys. Rev. C94, 025205 (2016)

    2016

  8. [15]

    Nanovaet al., Eur

    M. Nanovaet al., Eur. Phys. J. A54, 182 (2018)

    2018

  9. [16]

    Nanovaet al., Phys

    M. Nanovaet al., Phys. Lett. B710, 600 (2012)

    2012

  10. [17]

    Friedrichet al., Eur

    S. Friedrichet al., Eur. Phys. J. A52, 297 (2016)

    2016

  11. [18]

    D. Jido, H. Nagahiro, and S. Hirenzaki, Phys. Rev. C85, 032201(R) (2012)

    2012

  12. [19]

    Itahashiet al., Prog

    K. Itahashiet al., Prog. Theor. Phys.128, 601 (2012)

    2012

  13. [20]

    Y. K. Tanakaet al., Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 202501 (2016)

    2016

  14. [21]

    Y. K. Tanakaet al., Phys. Rev. C97, 015202 (2018)

    2018

  15. [22]

    Tomidaet al., Phys

    N. Tomidaet al., Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 202501 (2020)

    2020

  16. [23]

    Fujioka, K

    H. Fujioka, K. Itahashi, V. Metag, M. Nanova, and Y. K. Tanaka, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 019201 (2021)

    2021

  17. [24]

    V. Yu. Grishinaet al., Phys. Lett. B475, 9 (2000)

    2000

  18. [26]

    Ikenoet al., arXiv:2406.06058 [nucl-th] (2025)

    N. Ikenoet al., arXiv:2406.06058 [nucl-th] (2025)

    2025

  19. [27]

    Naraet al., Phys

    Y. Naraet al., Phys. Rev. C61, 024901 (2000)

    2000

  20. [28]

    Geisselet al., Nucl

    H. Geisselet al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. B 70, 286 (1992)

    1992

  21. [29]

    Bargholtzet al., Nucl

    C. Bargholtzet al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 594, 339 (2008)

    2008

  22. [30]

    R. J. M. Y. Ruberet al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A503, 431 (2003)

    2003

  23. [31]

    Sekiyaet al., Nucl

    R. Sekiyaet al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 1034, 166745 (2022)

    2022

  24. [32]

    Y. K. Tanakaet al., Acta Phys. Pol. B Proc. Suppl.16, 4-A27 (2023)

    2023

  25. [33]

    Ohlsson, C

    M. Ohlsson, C. Peterson, and A. Yuille, Comput. Phys. Commun.71, 77 (1992)

    1992

  26. [34]

    H¨ oppneret al., Nucl

    C. H¨ oppneret al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 620, 518 (2010)

    2010

  27. [35]

    Y. K. Tanakaet al., arXiv:2507.10454 [physics.ins-det] (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Agostinelliet al., Nucl

    S. Agostinelliet al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 506, 250 (2003)

    2003

  29. [37]

    Bruns and A

    P.C. Bruns and A. Ciep’y, Nucl. Phys. A992, 121630 (2019)

    2019

  30. [38]

    Sakai and D

    S. Sakai and D. Jido, Phys. Rev. C107, 025207 (2023)

    2023

  31. [39]

    Busset al., Phys

    O. Busset al., Phys. Rep.512, 1 (2012)

    2012

  32. [40]

    Lyons, Ann

    L. Lyons, Ann. Appl. Stat.2, 887 (2008)

    2008

  33. [41]

    Kumar and A

    A. Kumar and A. Mishra, Chin. Phys. C49, 074106 (2025)

    2025

  34. [42]

    Friedman and A

    E. Friedman and A. Gal, arXiv:2507.05832 [nucl-th] (2025). 7 Supplemental Material: Excitation Spectra of the 12C(p,d) Reaction near the η′-Meson Emission Threshold Measured in Coincidence with High-Momentum Protons Excitation-energy spectra with sideband cuts Here, we provide...

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.