pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.18287 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-20 · ⚛️ nucl-ex · nucl-th

Recognition: unknown

Constraining the trend of the N = 50 shell gap towards ¹⁰⁰Sn with the masses of ⁹⁶⁻⁹⁸Cd

D. Lange , D. Atanasov , M. Au , A. Belley , M. Benhatchi , K. Blaum , R. B. Cakirli , P. F. Giesel
show 19 more authors
A. Herlert J. D. Holt B. S. Hu A. Jaries C. Klink Yu. A. Litvinov D. Lunney V. Manea F. Mehlhorn T. Miyagi M. Mougeot S. Naimi L. Nies M. Schlaich Ch. Schweiger L. Schweikhard T. Shickele A. Todd W. Wojtaczka
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 03:08 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ nucl-ex nucl-th
keywords nuclear massesN=50 shell gapcadmium isotopestin-100Coulomb displacement energiesnuclear structureISOLTRAPshell evolution
0
0 comments X

The pith

Mass measurements of 96-98Cd show the N=50 shell gap strengthening toward 100Sn.

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

The paper reports the first precise masses of the neutron-deficient cadmium isotopes 96Cd, 97Cd, and 98Cd, obtained with the ISOLTRAP spectrometer. These data yield the empirical N=50 shell gap directly at proton number Z=48 and also fix the excitation energy of the 25/2+ isomer in 97Cd. By applying the observed systematics of Coulomb Displacement Energies, the authors extend the gap values to the higher-Z chains that approach tin-100. The resulting trend indicates that the shell gap increases rather than decreases as one moves toward the doubly magic nucleus 100Sn, and this experimental pattern is compared with current energy-density functional and ab initio calculations.

Core claim

Precise binding-energy measurements of 96-98Cd allow the empirical N=50 shell gap to be determined at Z=48 for the first time. Coulomb Displacement Energy systematics are then used to infer the gap values at higher proton numbers, producing a tightly constrained mass surface in the 100Sn region. The data indicate an enhancement of the gap as Z increases toward 50, a trend that is placed in direct comparison with state-of-the-art theoretical calculations.

What carries the argument

Empirical shell gap extracted from mass differences, extended to higher-Z nuclei via Coulomb Displacement Energy systematics.

If this is right

  • The mass surface near 100Sn is now more tightly bounded, reducing uncertainty in predictions for nearby nuclei.
  • Theoretical models must reproduce an increasing rather than shrinking N=50 gap when moving from Z=48 to Z=50.
  • Input for r-process calculations involving nuclei around tin-100 is improved.
  • The excitation energy of the 25/2+ isomer in 97Cd is fixed, providing a new benchmark for nuclear structure calculations.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the enhancement persists all the way to 100Sn, the nucleus may be more robustly magic than some models have assumed.
  • Direct mass measurements of 99Cd or 100Sn would test the extrapolation without relying on Coulomb Displacement Energy assumptions.
  • The observed trend may help discriminate between different parameterizations of energy-density functionals in the Z=50 region.
  • Ab initio approaches that currently underpredict the gap size would need adjustments to the underlying nuclear interactions or many-body methods.

Load-bearing premise

Coulomb Displacement Energies can be extrapolated smoothly from the measured cadmium region to higher proton numbers without introducing large additional uncertainties.

What would settle it

A direct, high-precision mass measurement of 100Sn or 99In that yields a shell-gap value falling well outside the extrapolated trend band.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.18287 by A. Belley, A. Herlert, A. Jaries, A. Todd, B. S. Hu, Ch. Schweiger, C. Klink, D. Atanasov, D. Lange, D. Lunney, F. Mehlhorn, J. D. Holt, K. Blaum, L. Nies, L. Schweikhard, M. Au, M. Benhatchi, M. Mougeot, M. Schlaich, P. F. Giesel, R. B. Cakirli, S. Naimi, T. Miyagi, T. Shickele, V. Manea, W. Wojtaczka, Yu. A. Litvinov.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: ToF spectra of m/q = 96 (top) and 97 (bottom) mass-separated beam of a LaCx target at 1000 revolutions with t ′ = 23605.8 µs and 23728.72 µs, respectively. The laser￾on data (gray) is modeled using the hyper-EMG PDF [33] (black line). Cadmium ions are unambiguously identified by comparison with ToF data obtained while the RILIS-laser was blocked (red). with ∆ref = √m1 − √m2, Σref = √m1 + √m2 and CToF = (2t… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: N = 50 empirical shell gap in its two-neutron (left) and one-neutron (center) variants, compared to theoretical calculations. The experimental data are from the AME2020 (open circles), this work (filled red circles) and extrapolations based on the systematics of CDE (open red circles). The theory data are from the Generator Coordinate Method (GCM) [46] (green triangles) and Density Functional Theory (DFT) … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present the first determination of the $N = 50$ empirical shell gap at $Z = 48$ by precise mass measurements of the neutron-deficient cadmium isotopes $^{96-98}$Cd with the ISOLTRAP mass spectrometer at ISOLDE-CERN, including the first precise determination of the excitation energy of the $25/2^+$ isomer in $^{97}$Cd. Through the systematics of Coulomb Displacement Energies, we further deduce the empirical shell gap in the higher-$Z$ isotopic chains, tightly constraining the $^{100}$Sn mass-surface region. The new experimental data suggest an enhancement of the gap towards $^{100}$Sn, which is discussed in comparison to state-of-the-art calculations using energy-density functional and new ab initio approaches.

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

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports high-precision Penning-trap mass measurements of the neutron-deficient cadmium isotopes 96Cd, 97Cd and 98Cd performed with ISOLTRAP at ISOLDE-CERN. These data yield the first determination of the N=50 empirical shell gap at Z=48 together with the excitation energy of the 25/2+ isomer in 97Cd. Using established Coulomb Displacement Energy systematics the authors extrapolate the gap to the In (Z=49) and Sn (Z=50) chains, thereby constraining the mass surface around 100Sn. The results indicate an enhancement of the N=50 gap towards 100Sn that is compared with energy-density-functional and ab-initio calculations.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the work supplies the first experimental anchor for the N=50 gap at Z=48 and extends it to the 100Sn region via a standard extrapolation technique. Such constraints are valuable for testing shell-evolution predictions in a region where data remain sparse and for discriminating among modern EDF and ab-initio approaches.

major comments (1)
  1. [CDE systematics and deduced shell gaps] The claim of an enhanced N=50 gap towards 100Sn rests on the extrapolation of Coulomb Displacement Energies from the newly measured Z=48 Cd masses to Z=49 and Z=50. The manuscript does not provide a quantitative uncertainty budget or sensitivity analysis for possible Z-dependent deviations or additional model dependence in this step (see the section on CDE systematics and the deduced gaps). Because this extrapolation is load-bearing for the enhancement trend and the subsequent theory comparison, the additional uncertainties must be explicitly evaluated and propagated.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful review and positive evaluation of the significance of our measurements. We address the single major comment below and will revise the manuscript to incorporate the requested analysis.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The claim of an enhanced N=50 gap towards 100Sn rests on the extrapolation of Coulomb Displacement Energies from the newly measured Z=48 Cd masses to Z=49 and Z=50. The manuscript does not provide a quantitative uncertainty budget or sensitivity analysis for possible Z-dependent deviations or additional model dependence in this step (see the section on CDE systematics and the deduced gaps). Because this extrapolation is load-bearing for the enhancement trend and the subsequent theory comparison, the additional uncertainties must be explicitly evaluated and propagated.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit quantitative uncertainty budget and sensitivity analysis for the CDE extrapolation would improve the robustness of the manuscript. Although the CDE approach follows established systematics used in prior works on this mass region, the current text does not detail possible Z-dependent deviations or propagate associated model uncertainties. In the revised version we will add a dedicated paragraph (or short subsection) that: (i) quantifies the uncertainty from the linear CDE fit to known data, (ii) tests sensitivity to alternative parametrizations reported in the literature, and (iii) propagates the resulting uncertainties to the extrapolated N=50 gaps at Z=49 and Z=50, including their effect on the trend toward 100Sn and on the theory comparisons. These additions will not alter the central experimental results or the qualitative conclusion of gap enhancement, but will make the extrapolation step fully transparent. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation rests on direct measurements and external systematics

full rationale

The paper's core results are new experimental masses of 96-98Cd obtained with ISOLTRAP, from which the N=50 gap at Z=48 follows directly via standard binding-energy differences. Extension to Z=49 and Z=50 uses Coulomb Displacement Energy systematics drawn from prior literature, not redefined or fitted within this work. No equations or steps equate a claimed prediction to its own input by construction, and no load-bearing uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported solely via self-citation. The comparison to EDF and ab initio models is an external benchmark, leaving the derivation chain self-contained against independent data.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The claim rests on the accuracy of the mass measurements and the validity of Coulomb Displacement Energy systematics for extrapolation; no free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Empirical shell gap can be extracted from differences in two-neutron separation energies derived from measured masses.
    Standard definition used to convert mass data into shell-gap values.
  • domain assumption Coulomb Displacement Energy systematics remain valid for extrapolating the N=50 gap from Z=48 to higher Z up to 50.
    Invoked to deduce the gap trend toward 100Sn.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5582 in / 1420 out tokens · 33919 ms · 2026-05-10T03:08:20.370449+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

71 extracted references · 63 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    unknown isobars

    (green triangles) and Density Functional Theory (DFT) [47, 48] (blue and violet triangles) using Skyrme interactions, as well as newab initiocalculations (in diamonds) using different chiral interactions in the valence-space in-medium similarity renormalization group (VS-IMSRG): EM(1.8/2.0) [49, 50] (orange),∆NNLOGO [51] (dark green) and N3LOLNL [52] (cya...

    2020

  2. [2]

    Faestermann, M

    T. Faestermann, M. Górska, and H. Grawe. The struc- ture of 100Snand neighbouring nuclei.Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys., 69:85–130, 2013. ISSN 0146-6410. doi: 10.1016/j.ppnp.2012.10.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2012.10.002 2013

  3. [3]

    M. Górska. Trends in the Structure of Nuclei near 100Sn.Physics, 4(1):364–382, 2022. ISSN 2624-8174. doi:10.3390/physics4010024

    work page doi:10.3390/physics4010024 2022

  4. [4]

    T. D. Morris, J. Simonis, S. R. Stroberg, C. Stumpf, G. Hagen, J. D. Holt, G. R. Jansen, T. Papenbrock, R. Roth, and A. Schwenk. Structure of the Lightest Tin Isotopes.Phys. Rev. Lett., 120:152503, 2018. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.152503

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.120.152503 2018

  5. [5]

    Miyagi, S.R

    T. Miyagi, S.R. Stroberg, J.D. Holt, and N. Shimizu. Ab initiomultishell valence-space Hamiltonians and the island of inversion.Phys. Rev. C, 102:034320, Sep 2020. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.102.034320

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.102.034320 2020

  6. [6]

    Mougeot, D

    M. Mougeot, D. Atanasov, J. Karthein, R.N. Wolf, et al. Mass measurements of 99−101In challengeab initionu- clear theory of the nuclide 100Sn.Nat. Phys., 17(10): 1099–1103, 9 2021. doi:10.1038/s41567-021-01326-9

    work page doi:10.1038/s41567-021-01326-9 2021

  7. [7]

    Presentstatusand future challenges of non-interferometric tests of collapse models.Nature Phys., 18(3):243–250, 2022

    J. Karthein et al. Electromagnetic properties of indium isotopes illuminate the doubly magic character of100Sn. Nat. Phys., 20(11):1719–1725, 2024. doi:10.1038/s41567- 024-02612-y

    work page doi:10.1038/s41567- 2024

  8. [8]

    Z. Ge, M. Reponen, et al. High-Precision Mass Measurements of Neutron Deficient Silver Isotopes Probe the Robustness of theN= 50Shell Clo- sure.Phys. Rev. Lett., 133:132503, Sep 2024. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.133.132503

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.133.132503 2024

  9. [9]

    Gustafsson et al

    F.P. Gustafsson et al. Charge Radii Measurements of Exotic Tin Isotopes in the Proximity ofN= 50and N= 82.Phys. Rev. Lett., 135(22):222501, 2025. doi: 10.1103/wbdx-k3cd

    work page doi:10.1103/wbdx-k3cd 2025

  10. [10]

    Nies et al

    L. Nies et al. Isomeric Excitation Energy for 99In m from Mass Spectrometry Reveals Constant Trend Next to Doubly Magic 100Sn.Phys. Rev. Lett., 131:022502, Jul 2023. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.022502

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.131.022502 2023

  11. [11]

    Maheshwari, P

    B. Maheshwari, P. Van Isacker, and P.M. Walker. Quan- tifying neutron-proton interactions inN= 51isotones: From the NEEC candidate93Moto 99Cd.Phys. Rev. C, 112:024308, Aug 2025. doi:10.1103/3knl-yywc

    work page doi:10.1103/3knl-yywc 2025

  12. [12]

    Cederwall et al

    B. Cederwall et al. Evidence for a spin-aligned neutron– proton paired phase from the level structure of 92Pd. Nature, 469(7328):68–71, Jan2011. ISSN1476-4687. doi: 10.1038/nature09644

    work page doi:10.1038/nature09644

  13. [13]

    Cyburt, A.M

    R.H. Cyburt, A.M. Amthor, A. Heger, E. Johnson, L. Keek, Z. Meisel, H. Schatz, and K. Smith. De- pendence of X-Ray Burst Models on Nuclear Reac- tion Rates.Astrophys. J., 830(2):55, oct 2016. doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/830/2/55

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/830/2/55 2016

  14. [14]

    Schatz and W.-J

    H. Schatz and W.-J. Ong. Dependence of X-Ray Burst Models on Nuclear Masses.Astrophys. J., 844(2):139, aug 2017. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7de9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7de9 2017

  15. [15]

    Ireland et al

    C.M. Ireland et al. Mass of 101Snand Bayesian ex- trapolations to the proton drip line.Phys. Rev. C, 113: L021302, Feb 2026. doi:10.1103/vck7-1c4t

    work page doi:10.1103/vck7-1c4t 2026

  16. [16]

    Xing et al

    Y.M. Xing et al. Isochronous mass measurements of neutron-deficient nuclei from 112Snprojectile fragmen- tation.Phys. Rev. C, 107:014304, Jan 2023. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.107.014304

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.107.014304 2023

  17. [17]

    Nies et al

    L. Nies et al. Refining the nuclear mass surface with the mass of103Sn.Phys. Rev. C, 111:014315, Jan 2025. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.111.014315

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.111.014315 2025

  18. [18]

    Ireland, F.M

    C.M. Ireland, F.M. Maier, et al. High-precision mass measurement of 103Snrestores smoothness of the mass surface.Phys. Rev. C, 111:014314, Jan 2025. doi: 7 10.1103/PhysRevC.111.014314

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.111.014314 2025

  19. [19]

    Lubos, J

    D. Lubos, J. Park, T. Faestermann, R. Gernhäuser, R. Krücken, M. Lewitowicz, S. Nishimura, H. Sakurai, et al. Improved Value for the Gamow-Teller Strength of the 100SnBeta Decay.Phys. Rev. Lett., 122:222502, Jun

  20. [20]

    doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.222502

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.122.222502

  21. [21]

    Hinke et al

    C.B. Hinke et al. Superallowed Gamow–Teller de- cay of the doubly magic nucleus 100Sn.Nature, 486 (7403):341–345, Jun 2012. ISSN 1476-4687. doi: 10.1038/nature11116

    work page doi:10.1038/nature11116 2012

  22. [22]

    Satuła, D.J

    W. Satuła, D.J. Dean, J. Gary, S. Mizutori, and W. Nazarewicz. On the origin of the Wigner energy. Phys. Lett. B, 407(2):103–109, 1997. ISSN 0370-2693. doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(97)00711-9

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(97)00711-9 1997

  23. [23]

    Mollaebrahimi, Ch

    A. Mollaebrahimi, Ch. Hornung, T. Dickel, D. Aman- bayev, G. Kripko-Koncz, W.R. Plaß, et al. Study- ing Gamow-Teller transitions and the assignment of isomeric and ground states atN= 50.Phys. Lett. B, 839:137833, 2023. ISSN 0370-2693. doi: 10.1016/j.physletb.2023.137833

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2023.137833 2023

  24. [24]

    Hergert, S.K

    H. Hergert, S.K. Bogner, T.D. Morris, A. Schwenk, and K. Tsukiyama. The In-Medium Similarity Renormaliza- tion Group: A novelab initiomethod for nuclei.Phys. Rept., 621:165, 2016. doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2015.12.007

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2015.12.007 2016

  25. [25]

    Catherall, W

    R. Catherall, W. Andreazza, M. Breitenfeldt, A. Dor- sival, G.J. Focker, T.P. Gharsa, T.J. Giles, J.-L. Grenard, F. Locci, P. Martins, S. Marzari, J. Schipper, A. Shornikov, and T. Stora. The ISOLDE facility.J. Phys. G: Nucl. and Part. Phys., 44(9):094002, aug 2017. doi:10.1088/1361-6471/aa7eba

    work page doi:10.1088/1361-6471/aa7eba 2017

  26. [27]

    The strong coupling constant: state of the art and the decade ahead,

    V. Fedosseev, K. Chrysalidis, T. Day Goodacre, B. Marsh, S. Rothe, C. Seiffert, and K. Wendt. Ion beam production and study of radioactive isotopes with the laser ion source at ISOLDE.J. Phys. G: Nucl. and Part. Phys., 44(8):084006, jul 2017. doi:10.1088/1361- 6471/aa78e0

    work page doi:10.1088/1361- 2017

  27. [28]

    Herfurth, J

    F. Herfurth, J. Dilling, A. Kellerbauer, G. Bollen, S. Henry, H.-J. Kluge, E. Lamour, D. Lunney, R.B. Moore, C. Scheidenberger, S. Schwarz, G. Sikler, and J. Szerypo. A linear radiofrequency ion trap for ac- cumulation, bunching, and emittance improvement of radioactive ion beams.Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A, 469(2):254–275, 2001. ISSN 0168-9002. d...

    work page doi:10.1016/s0168-9002(01)00168-1 2001

  28. [29]

    Kellerbauer, T

    A. Kellerbauer, T. Kim, R.B. Moore, and P. Varfalvy. Buffer gas cooling of ion beams.Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A, 469(2):276–285, 2001. ISSN 0168-9002. doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(01)00286-8

    work page doi:10.1016/s0168-9002(01)00286-8 2001

  29. [30]

    Lunney and (on behalf of the ISOLTRAP Collabora- tion)

    D. Lunney and (on behalf of the ISOLTRAP Collabora- tion). Extending and refining the nuclear mass surface with ISOLTRAP.J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys., 44(6): 064008, may 2017. doi:10.1088/1361-6471/aa6752

    work page doi:10.1088/1361-6471/aa6752 2017

  30. [31]

    R.N. Wolf, F. Wienholtz, et al. ISOLTRAP’s multi- reflection time-of-flight mass separator/spectrometer. Int. J. Mass Spectrom., 349-350:123–133, 2013. ISSN 1387-3806. doi:10.1016/j.ijms.2013.03.020

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ijms.2013.03.020 2013

  31. [32]

    R.N. Wolf, G. Marx, M. Rosenbusch, and L. Schweikhard. Static-mirror ion capture and time focusing for electrostatic ion-beam traps and multi-reflection time-of-flight mass analyzers by use of an in-trap potential lift.Int. J. Mass Spectrom., 313: 8–14, 3 2012. doi:10.1016/j.ijms.2011.12.006

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ijms.2011.12.006 2012

  32. [33]

    F.Wienholtz, S.Kreim, M.Rosenbusch, L.Schweikhard, and R.N. Wolf. Mass-selective ion ejection from multi- reflection time-of-flight devices via a pulsed in-trap lift. Int. J. Mass Spectrom., 421:285–293, 10 2017. doi: 10.1016/J.IJMS.2017.07.016

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ijms.2017.07.016 2017

  33. [34]

    Wienholtz et al

    F. Wienholtz et al. Masses of exotic calcium isotopes pin down nuclear forces.Nature, 498:346–349, 2013. doi: 10.1038/nature12226

    work page doi:10.1038/nature12226 2013

  34. [35]

    Purushothaman, S

    S. Purushothaman, S. Ayet San Andrés, J. Bergmann, T. Dickel, J. Ebert, H. Geissel, C. Hornung, W.R. Plaß, C. Rappold, C. Scheidenberger, Y.K. Tanaka, and M.I. Yavor. Hyper-EMG: A new probability distribution function composed of Exponentially Modified Gaussian distributionstoanalyzeasymmetricpeakshapesinhigh- resolution time-of-flight mass spectrometry.I...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ijms.2017.07.014 2017

  35. [36]

    Wienholtz, K

    F. Wienholtz, K. Blaum, J. Karthein, D. Lunney, S. Malbrunot-Ettenauer, V. Manea, M. Mougeot, L. Schweikhard, T. Steinsberger, and R.N. Wolf. Im- proved stability of multi-reflection time-of-flight mass spectrometers through passive and active voltage sta- bilization.Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. B, 463: 348–356, 1 2019. doi:10.1016/J.NIMB.2019.04.061

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2019.04.061 2019

  36. [37]

    Schweiger et al

    Ch. Schweiger et al. in preparation. 2026

    2026

  37. [38]

    Fischer, S

    P. Fischer, S. Knauer, G. Marx, and L. Schweikhard. Non-isobaric time-of-flight correction for isobar resolv- ing in MR-ToF mass spectrometry.Int. J. Mass Spectrom., 432:44–51, 2018. ISSN 1387-3806. doi: 10.1016/j.ijms.2018.07.004

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ijms.2018.07.004 2018

  38. [39]

    , title=

    H. Dembinski and P. Ongmongkolkul et al. scikit- hep/iminuit. Dec 2020. doi:10.5281/zenodo.3949207

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.3949207 2020

  39. [40]

    James and M

    F. James and M. Roos. Minuit - A System for Func- tion Minimization and Analysis of the Parameter Errors and Correlations.Comput. Phys. Commun., 10:343–367,

  40. [41]

    doi:10.1016/0010-4655(75)90039-9

    work page doi:10.1016/0010-4655(75)90039-9

  41. [42]

    S. Nagy, K. Blaum, and R. Schuch.Trapped Charged Particles and Fundamental Interactions, volume 749 of Lecture Notes in Physics. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg,

  42. [43]

    doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-77817-2

    ISBN 978-3-540-77816-5 978-3-540-77817-2. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-77817-2

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-540-77817-2

  43. [44]

    R.T. Birge. The Calculation of Errors by the Method of Least Squares.Phys. Rev., 40:207–227, Apr 1932. doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.40.207

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.40.207 1932

  44. [45]

    Wang, W.J

    M. Wang, W.J. Huang, F.G. Kondev, G. Audi, and S. Naimi. The AME 2020 atomic mass evaluation (II). Tables, graphs and references.Chin. Phys. C, 45(3): 8 030003, mar 2021. doi:10.1088/1674-1137/abddaf

    work page doi:10.1088/1674-1137/abddaf 2020

  45. [46]

    J. Park, R. Krücken, D. Lubos, R. Gernhäuser, M. Le- witowicz, S. Nishimura, et al. New and comprehen- siveβ- andβp-decay spectroscopy results in the vicin- ity of 100Sn.Phys. Rev. C, 99:034313, Mar 2019. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.99.034313

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.99.034313 2019

  46. [47]

    K. Ogawa. Shell-model calculations of high-spin isomers in neutron-deficient1g 9 2 -shell nuclei.Phys. Rev. C, 28: 958–960, Aug 1983. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.28.958

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.28.958 1983

  47. [48]

    Kondev, M

    F.G. Kondev, M. Wang, W.J. Huang, S. Naimi, and G. Audi. The NUBASE2020 evaluation of nuclear physics properties.Chin. Phys. C, 45(3):030001, mar

  48. [49]

    doi:10.1088/1674-1137/abddae

    work page doi:10.1088/1674-1137/abddae

  49. [50]

    Manea, J

    V. Manea, J. Karthein, et al. First Glimpse of theN= 82Shell Closure belowZ= 50from Masses of Neutron-Rich Cadmium Isotopes and Iso- mers.Phys. Rev. Lett., 124:092502, Mar 2020. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.092502

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.124.092502 2020

  50. [51]

    Bender, G.F

    M. Bender, G.F. Bertsch, and P.-H. Heenen. Global study of quadrupole correlation effects.Phys. Rev. C, 73:034322, 2006. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.73.034322

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.73.034322 2006

  51. [52]

    Grams, N.N

    G. Grams, N.N. Shchechilin, A. Sánchez- Fernández, W. Ryssens, N. Chamel, and S. Goriely. Skyrme–Hartree–Fock–Bogoliubov mass models on a 3D mesh: IV. Improved description of the isospin depen- dence of pairing.Eur. Phys. J. A, 61(2):35–, feb 2025. ISSN 1434601X. doi:10.1140/epja/s10050-025-01503-x

    work page doi:10.1140/epja/s10050-025-01503-x 2025

  52. [53]

    Grams, W

    G. Grams, W. Ryssens, A. Sánchez-Fernández, N.N. Shchechilin, L. González-Miret Zaragoza, P. Demol, N. Chamel, S. Goriely, and M. Bender. Skyrme-Hartree- Fock-Bogoliubov mass models on a 3D mesh: V. The N2LO extension of the Skyrme EDF, 2026. URLhttps: //arxiv.org/abs/2601.05968

    work page arXiv 2026

  53. [54]

    Entem and R

    D.R. Entem and R. Machleidt. Accurate charge- dependent nucleon-nucleon potential at fourth order of chiral perturbation theory.Phys. Rev. C, 68:041001, Oct

  54. [55]

    doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.68.041001

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.68.041001

  55. [56]

    Hebeler, S.K

    K. Hebeler, S.K. Bogner, R.J. Furnstahl, A. Nogga, and A. Schwenk. Improved nuclear matter calcula- tions from chiral low-momentum interactions.Phys. Rev. C, 83(3):031301, mar 2011. ISSN 0556-2813. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.83.031301

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.83.031301 2011

  56. [57]

    Jiang, A

    W.G. Jiang, A. Ekström, C. Forssén, G. Hagen, G.R. Jansen, and T. Papenbrock. Accurate bulk proper- ties of nuclei fromA= 2to∞from potentials with ∆isobars.Phys. Rev. C, 102:054301, Nov 2020. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.102.054301

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.102.054301 2020

  57. [58]

    V. Somà, P. Navrátil, F. Raimondi, C. Barbieri, and T. Duguet. Novel chiral Hamiltonian and observables in light and medium-mass nuclei.Phys. Rev. C, 101: 014318, Jan 2020. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.101.014318

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.101.014318 2020

  58. [59]

    M. S. Antony, A. Pape, and J. Britz. Coulomb displace- ment energies between analog levels for3≤A≤239. At. Data Nucl. Data Tab., 66(1):1–63, 1997. ISSN 0092- 640X. doi:10.1006/adnd.1997.0740

    work page doi:10.1006/adnd.1997.0740 1997

  59. [60]

    Hockenbery, T

    Z. Hockenbery, T. Murböck, et al. Precision mass measurements of 74−76Srusing the multiple reflection time-of-flight mass spectrometer at TI- TAN.Phys. Rev. C, 111:014327, Jan 2025. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.111.014327

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.111.014327 2025

  60. [61]

    1998, NuPhA, 635, 231, doi: 10.1016/S0375-9474(98)00180-8

    E. Chabanat, P. Bonche, P. Haensel, J. Meyer, and R. Schaeffer. A Skyrme parametrization from subnu- clear to neutron star densities Part II. Nuclei far from stabilities.Nucl. Phys. A, 635(1):231–256, 1998. ISSN 0375-9474. doi:10.1016/S0375-9474(98)00180-8

    work page doi:10.1016/s0375-9474(98)00180-8 1998

  61. [62]

    Epelbaum, H.-W

    E. Epelbaum, H.-W. Hammer, and Ulf-G. Meißner. Modern Theory of Nuclear Forces.Rev. Mod. Phys., 81:1773, 2009. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.81.1773

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.81.1773 2009

  62. [63]

    Machleidt and D.R

    R. Machleidt and D.R. Entem. Chiral effective field the- ory and nuclear forces.Phys. Rep., 503:1–75, 2011. doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2011.02.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2011.02.001 2011

  63. [64]

    Stroberg, A

    S.R. Stroberg, A. Calci, H. Hergert, J.D. Holt, S.K. Bogner, R. Roth, and A. Schwenk. Nucleus- Dependent Valence-Space Approach to Nuclear Struc- ture.Phys. Rev. Lett., 118:032502, Jan 2017. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.032502

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.118.032502 2017

  64. [65]

    Stroberg, H

    S.R. Stroberg, H. Hergert, S.K. Bogner, and J.D. Holt. Nonempirical Interactions for the Nuclear Shell Model: An Update.Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci., 69 (Volume 69, 2019):307–362, 2019. ISSN 1545-4134. doi: 10.1146/annurev-nucl-101917-021120

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-101917-021120 2019

  65. [66]

    Simonis, S.R

    J. Simonis, S.R. Stroberg, K. Hebeler, J.D. Holt, and A. Schwenk. Saturation with chiral interactions and con- sequences for finite nuclei.Phys. Rev. C, 96(1):014303,

  66. [67]

    doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.96.014303

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.96.014303

  67. [68]

    Leistenschneider et al

    E. Leistenschneider et al. Dawning of theN= 32Shell Closure Seen through Precision Mass Measurements of Neutron-Rich Titanium Isotopes.Phys. Rev. Lett., 120 (6):062503, 2018. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.062503

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.120.062503 2018

  68. [69]

    Shimizu, T

    N. Shimizu, T. Mizusaki, Y. Utsuno, and Y. Tsun- oda. Thick-restart block Lanczos method for large- scale shell-model calculations.Comput. Phys. Com- mun., 244:372–384, 2019. ISSN 0010-4655. doi: 10.1016/j.cpc.2019.06.011

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2019.06.011 2019

  69. [70]

    Miyagi, S.R

    T. Miyagi, S.R. Stroberg, P. Navrátil, K. Hebeler, and J. D. Holt. Convergedab initiocalculations of heavy nuclei.Phys. Rev. C, 105(1):014302, 2022. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.105.014302

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.105.014302 2022

  70. [71]

    He and S.R

    B.C. He and S.R. Stroberg. Factorized approximation to the in-medium similarity renormalization group IM- SRG(3).Phys. Rev. C, 110:044317, Oct 2024. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.110.044317

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.110.044317 2024

  71. [72]

    Hildenbrand, S

    F. Hildenbrand, S. Elhatisari, Ulf-G. Meißner, H. Meyer, Z. Ren, A. Herten, and M. Bode. Lattice Calculation of the Sn Isotopes near the Proton Dripline.Phys. Rev. Lett., 136:062501, Feb 2026. doi:10.1103/n7nt-s64t

    work page doi:10.1103/n7nt-s64t 2026