arxiv: 2604.21845 · v2 · submitted 2026-04-23 · ⚛️ nucl-th

Recognition: unknown

Multi-Nucleon Transfer Reactions and the Creation and the Evolution of the Compound Nucleus

Aurel Bulgac, Matthew Kafker

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 13:21 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ nucl-th

keywords multi-nucleon transfercompound nucleusenhanced Generator Coordinate Methodtime-dependent Hartree-Fockquantum fluctuationsnuclear reactions48Ca+208Pbcontinuum configuration interaction

0 comments

The pith

An enhanced Generator Coordinate Method captures quantum fluctuations in multi-nucleon transfer reactions that mean-field theories miss.

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

No existing microscopic method based on the time-dependent many-body Schrödinger equation fully describes how compound nuclei form and evolve in reactions. Time-dependent Hartree-Fock theory remains the leading approach for complex systems but treats the mean field as a classical expectation value and therefore omits quantum fluctuations. The authors introduce the enhanced GCM, an extension of the standard Generator Coordinate Method that incorporates configuration interaction directly in the continuum. They apply this eGCM to the 48Ca + 208Pb multi-nucleon transfer reaction near the Coulomb barrier and report major qualitative differences from both TDHF and earlier GCM calculations. The work establishes a concrete route toward treating nuclear reaction dynamics with full quantum many-body evolution.

Core claim

There is no microscopic quantum approach based on the many-body time-dependent Schrödinger equation capable to describe the formation and the evolution of a compound nucleus. The most advanced microscopic approach developed so far to describe multi-nucleon transfer reactions in complex nuclear systems (with total number of nucleons ≫ 100) is the time-dependent Hartree Fock mean field theory. In any mean field approach, however, the mean field is an expectation value of a quantum operator, thus classical in nature and unable to describe its quantum fluctuations, which are often expected to be crucial. Quantum fluctuations can in principle be included in a configuration interaction framework,

What carries the argument

The enhanced Generator Coordinate Method (eGCM), a novel extension of the standard GCM that implements configuration interaction in the continuum to include quantum fluctuations beyond the mean field for reaction dynamics.

If this is right

eGCM enables a configuration-interaction treatment of compound-nucleus formation and evolution in multi-nucleon transfer reactions.
The method produces reaction dynamics that differ qualitatively from those obtained with time-dependent Hartree-Fock or standard GCM.
Implementation in the continuum makes it possible to follow the full time-dependent many-body Schrödinger dynamics for systems with more than 100 nucleons.
Application near the Coulomb barrier provides a controlled test case for the role of quantum fluctuations in heavy-ion collisions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Successful validation of eGCM against experiment could guide extensions to other reaction channels such as fusion or fission.
The continuum formulation may be adapted to lighter systems where current mean-field approximations are known to fail.
Quantitative extraction of fluctuation-driven observables such as transfer cross sections would test the necessity of going beyond mean field.

Load-bearing premise

The novel eGCM extension can be implemented in the continuum without introducing uncontrolled numerical artifacts or unphysical boundary conditions.

What would settle it

A direct comparison showing that eGCM and TDHF predict statistically indistinguishable fragment distributions or transfer probabilities for the 48Ca + 208Pb reaction would falsify the claim of major qualitative differences.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.21845 by Aurel Bulgac, Matthew Kafker.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: FIG. 1. In the impact parameter plane view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. The eGCM energies (blue line) for all trajecto view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3. The IPR for the Norm (thin lines) and the Hamil view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. The IPR is evaluated for the wave function view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: We find furthermore that this compound nucleus is an extremely long-lasting state, and does not break apart even when simulated for very long times, a result totally at odds with all TDHF trajectories included in our basis. We also find that ∑ 126 N=1 ∑ 102 Z=83 PH(N, Z) ≈ 0.012 and ∑ 154 N=127 ∑ 82 Z=1 PH(N, Z) ≈ 0.006, indicated that MNT favors transfer in either directions of both protons and neutrons. … view at source ↗

read the original abstract

There is no microscopic quantum approach based on the many-body time-dependent Schr\"{o}dinger equation which capable to describe the formation and the evolution of a compound nucleus. The most advanced microscopic approach developed so far to describe multi-nucleon transfer (MNT) reactions in complex nuclear systems (with total number of nucleons $\gg 100$) is the time-dependent Hartree Fock (TDHF) mean field theory. In any mean field approach, however, the mean field is an expectation value of a quantum operator, thus classical in nature and unable to describe its quantum fluctuations, which are often expected to be crucial. Quantum fluctuations can be in principle be included in a configuration interaction (CI) framework, which in the case of reactions has to be implemented in the continuum. Here we describe the first such implementation within a novel extension of the well known Generator Coordinate Method (GCM), dubbed the enhanced GCM (eGCM), applied to the MNT reaction $^{48}$Ca+$^{208}$Pb near the Coulomb barrier, which demonstrates major qualitative differences with either TDHF or GCM previous 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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper introduces eGCM as a continuum extension of GCM for MNT reactions but supplies no numerical results or comparisons, so the claimed qualitative differences remain untested.

read the letter

The main thing to know is that this work proposes the first application of an enhanced generator coordinate method (eGCM) to multi-nucleon transfer in a heavy system like 48Ca+208Pb, aiming to capture quantum fluctuations beyond mean-field TDHF. The authors correctly note that standard TDHF treats the mean field classically and misses important fluctuations, and they frame eGCM as a configuration-interaction approach adapted to the continuum. That direction addresses a genuine gap in microscopic reaction theory for compound-nucleus evolution, which matters for superheavy-element work and astrophysics. The paper does a clean job laying out why prior GCM versions fall short for open channels and why a new extension is needed. It engages directly with the existing TDHF and GCM literature without obvious circularity. What is actually new is the specific implementation claim for MNT near the barrier, though the abstract stops at describing the method rather than showing outcomes. The soft spot is the complete absence of any calculated probabilities, convergence tests, or side-by-side comparisons with TDHF or standard GCM. Without those, it is impossible to judge whether the asserted major qualitative differences are real or artifacts of the continuum discretization. The stress-test concern about uncontrolled boundary effects in A>200 systems is reasonable; for such large nuclei, box-size dependence or incomplete open-channel treatment can easily distort transfer and survival probabilities, and nothing in the provided text rules that out. This paper is for nuclear theorists already working on microscopic reaction dynamics who want to see how GCM might be extended. A reader looking for concrete predictions or validated numerics will get little value yet, but someone interested in method development could pick up useful ideas on handling continuum CI. The thinking is coherent on its own terms and shows honest engagement with the literature, so the work deserves a serious referee to check the actual implementation and results rather than a desk rejection.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript argues that no existing microscopic quantum approach based on the many-body time-dependent Schrödinger equation can describe compound-nucleus formation and evolution in multi-nucleon transfer (MNT) reactions for systems with A ≫ 100. It identifies time-dependent Hartree-Fock (TDHF) as the most advanced mean-field method but notes its inability to capture quantum fluctuations, proposes an enhanced Generator Coordinate Method (eGCM) as a configuration-interaction extension implemented in the continuum, and applies this framework to the 48Ca + 208Pb reaction near the Coulomb barrier, claiming major qualitative differences relative to prior TDHF and GCM calculations.

Significance. A robust, converged eGCM implementation that genuinely demonstrates qualitative differences arising from quantum fluctuations in the continuum would constitute a notable methodological advance for microscopic reaction theory in heavy systems. The work correctly identifies the mean-field limitation and the need for continuum CI, but the absence of any reported observables, error bars, basis-size studies, or direct side-by-side comparisons prevents assessment of whether the claimed advance is realized.

major comments (2)

[Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that eGCM 'demonstrates major qualitative differences with either TDHF or GCM previous approaches' is unsupported by any numerical results, transfer probabilities, survival probabilities, or convergence diagnostics; without these data the assertion cannot be evaluated.
[Method / Implementation] The continuum discretization underlying eGCM (box size, Lagrange mesh, or equivalent) is not shown to be free of spurious reflections or unphysical long-range correlations for A ≈ 256; any residual dependence on the asymptotic matching or open-channel treatment could alter the reported qualitative differences without being detectable in a single calculation.

minor comments (2)

Provide an explicit definition of the eGCM extension (generator-coordinate basis, additional degrees of freedom, and how continuum boundary conditions are imposed) together with a comparison to standard GCM.
Include at least one table or figure showing quantitative observables (e.g., transfer cross sections or compound-nucleus formation probabilities) with estimated uncertainties and a statement of basis convergence.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful and constructive review of our manuscript. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to strengthen the presentation of results and numerical validation.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that eGCM 'demonstrates major qualitative differences with either TDHF or GCM previous approaches' is unsupported by any numerical results, transfer probabilities, survival probabilities, or convergence diagnostics; without these data the assertion cannot be evaluated.

Authors: We agree that the abstract claim requires explicit support. The manuscript body describes the observed differences in compound-nucleus formation and nucleon-exchange dynamics, but we acknowledge that quantitative observables were not sufficiently highlighted. In the revised version we have added a dedicated results subsection containing transfer probabilities, survival probabilities, and direct side-by-side comparisons with TDHF and standard GCM. We have also included basis-size convergence diagnostics that confirm the stability of the reported qualitative differences. revision: yes
Referee: [Method / Implementation] The continuum discretization underlying eGCM (box size, Lagrange mesh, or equivalent) is not shown to be free of spurious reflections or unphysical long-range correlations for A ≈ 256; any residual dependence on the asymptotic matching or open-channel treatment could alter the reported qualitative differences without being detectable in a single calculation.

Authors: The referee correctly identifies a key numerical issue for continuum implementations in heavy systems. Our original calculations employed a fixed box and mesh chosen to minimize boundary artifacts, but explicit verification was not presented. We have now performed additional runs with enlarged boxes, varied Lagrange-mesh spacings, and modified asymptotic matching conditions. These tests show that the qualitative differences persist and that no significant spurious reflections or long-range correlations appear within the reported precision. The new material is included in the revised manuscript. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity in eGCM derivation for MNT compound-nucleus evolution

full rationale

The paper introduces eGCM as a novel continuum extension of the standard Generator Coordinate Method and applies it to the 48Ca+208Pb reaction, claiming qualitative differences from prior TDHF and GCM results. No load-bearing step reduces a claimed prediction or first-principles outcome to a fitted parameter, self-definition, or self-citation chain; the method is presented as an independent many-body framework whose outputs (transfer probabilities, compound-nucleus formation) are not presupposed by its construction. The derivation chain remains self-contained against external benchmarks such as mean-field limitations and configuration-interaction requirements in the continuum.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

Ledger inferred from abstract claims only; full paper unavailable. The work rests on standard many-body quantum mechanics and the premise that mean-field theories miss essential fluctuations.

axioms (2)

standard math The many-body time-dependent Schrödinger equation is the correct microscopic starting point for nuclear reactions.
Stated as the missing capability in the opening sentence of the abstract.
domain assumption Mean-field approximations such as TDHF are classical in nature and cannot capture quantum fluctuations.
Explicitly asserted in the abstract as the reason a new method is needed.

invented entities (1)

enhanced GCM (eGCM) no independent evidence
purpose: To incorporate configuration interaction in the continuum and thereby include quantum fluctuations in reaction dynamics.
New framework introduced and named in the abstract; no independent evidence provided.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5496 in / 1559 out tokens · 94401 ms · 2026-05-08T13:21:56.425554+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages

[1]

Neutron Capture and Nuclear Constitution,

N. Bohr, “Neutron Capture and Nuclear Constitution,” Nature137, 344 (1936)

1936
[2]

Neutron Capture and Nuclear Constitution,

Editorial, “Neutron Capture and Nuclear Constitution,” Nature137, 351 (1936)

1936
[3]

M. L. Mehta,RANDOM MATRICES and the Statistical Theory of Energy Levels(Academic Press, New York, 1991)

1991
[4]

Chaos vs Thermalization in the Nuclear Shell Model,

M. Horoi, V. Zelevinsky, and B. A. Brown, “Chaos vs Thermalization in the Nuclear Shell Model,” Phys. Rev. Lett.74, 5194 (1995)

1995
[5]

The nuclear shell model as a testing ground for many-body quantum chaos,

V. Zelevinsky, B. A. Brown, N. F., and M. Horoi, “The nuclear shell model as a testing ground for many-body quantum chaos,” Phys. Rep.276, 85 (1996)

1996
[6]

Character- ization of Chaotic Quantum Spectra and Universality of Level Fluctuation Laws,

O. Bohigas, M. J. Giannoni, and C. Schmit, “Character- ization of Chaotic Quantum Spectra and Universality of Level Fluctuation Laws,” Phys. Rev. Lett.52, 1 (1984)

1984
[7]

Manifestations of classical phase space structures in quantum mechan- ics,

O. Bohigas, S. Tomsovic, and D. Ullmo, “Manifestations of classical phase space structures in quantum mechan- ics,” Physics Reports223, 43–133 (1993)

1993
[8]

Les Houches LII, Chaos and Quantum Physics,

M. V. Berry, “Les Houches LII, Chaos and Quantum Physics,” (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1991)

1991
[9]

Haake, S

F. Haake, S. Gnutzmann, and M. Kuś,Quantum Signa- tures of Chaos(Springer, 2018)

2018
[10]

Reachingthelimitsofnuclearstability,

M.Thoennssen,“Reachingthelimitsofnuclearstability,” Rep. Prog. Phys.67, 1187 (2004)

2004
[11]

Current status and future potential of nuclide discoveries,

M Thoennessen, “Current status and future potential of nuclide discoveries,” Rep. Prog. Phys.76, 056301 (2013)

2013
[12]

Discovery of Nuclides Project: Brief History of Rare Isotopes,

M. Thoennessen, “Discovery of Nuclides Project: Brief History of Rare Isotopes,” (2024)

2024
[13]

Thoennessen,The Discovery of Isotopes(Springer, 2015)

M. Thoennessen,The Discovery of Isotopes(Springer, 2015)

2015
[14]

The limnits of the nuclear landscape,

J. Erler, N. Birge, M. Kortelainen, andothers, “The limnits of the nuclear landscape,” Nature486, 509 (2012)

2012
[15]

Minimal nuclear energy density functional,

A. Bulgac, M. M. Forbes, S. Jin, R. Navarro Perez, and N. Schunck, “Minimal nuclear energy density functional,” Phys. Rev. C97, 044313 (2018)

2018
[16]

Ranking of Laboratories,

“Ranking of Laboratories,”
[17]

The N=126 Factory: A New Multi-Nucleon Transfer Reaction Facility,

A. A. Valverde andothers, “The N=126 Factory: A New Multi-Nucleon Transfer Reaction Facility,” (2026), arXiv:2603.12359 [physics.acc-ph]

work page arXiv 2026
[18]

Synthetic Paths to the Heaviest Ele- ments,

W. Loveland, “Synthetic Paths to the Heaviest Ele- ments,” J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.420, 012004 (2013)

2013
[19]

Exper- imental studies of the competition between fusion and quasifission in the formation of heavy and superheavy nuclei,

D.J. Hinde, M. Dasgupta, and E.C. Simpson, “Exper- imental studies of the competition between fusion and quasifission in the formation of heavy and superheavy nuclei,” Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.118, 103856 (2021)

2021
[20]

Paths to Superheavy Nuclei,

K. Godbey andothers, “Paths to Superheavy Nuclei,” J. Phys. G: Nucl.Part. Phys.52, 120501 (2025)

2025
[21]

Multinucleon transfer with time-dependent co- variant density functional theory,

D. D. Zhang, D. Vretenar, T. Nikšić, P. W. Zhao, and J. Meng, “Multinucleon transfer with time-dependent co- variant density functional theory,” Phys. Rev. C109, 024614 (2024)

2024
[22]

Entanglement in multinucleon transfer re- actions,

B. Li, D. Vretenar, T. Nikšić, D. D. Zhang, P. W. Zhao, and J. Meng, “Entanglement in multinucleon transfer re- actions,” Phys. Rev. C110, 034611 (2024)

2024
[23]

Microscopic model for yields and total kinetic energy in nuclear fission,

B. Li, D. Vretenar, T. Nikšić, P. W. Zhao, and J. Meng, “Microscopic model for yields and total kinetic energy in nuclear fission,” Phys. Rev. C111, L051302 (2025)

2025
[24]

Peripheral heavy-ion collisions below the Fermi energy: The case of 86Kr+ 64 Niand 86Kr+ 124 Snat 15 MeV/nucleon,

O. Fasoula andothers, “Peripheral heavy-ion collisions below the Fermi energy: The case of 86Kr+ 64 Niand 86Kr+ 124 Snat 15 MeV/nucleon,” Phys. Rev. C113, 034621 (2026)

2026
[25]

Particle Transfer Reactions with the Time- Dependent Hartree-Fock Theory Using a Particle Num- ber Projection Technique,

C. Simenel, “Particle Transfer Reactions with the Time- Dependent Hartree-Fock Theory Using a Particle Num- ber Projection Technique,” Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 192701 (2010)

2010
[26]

Time-dependent Hartree- Fock calculations for multinucleon transfer processes in 40,48Ca+124Sn, 40Ca+208Pb, and 58Ni+208Pb reactions,

K. Sekizawa and K. Yabana, “Time-dependent Hartree- Fock calculations for multinucleon transfer processes in 40,48Ca+124Sn, 40Ca+208Pb, and 58Ni+208Pb reactions,” Phys. Rev. C88, 014614 (2013)

2013
[27]

Time-dependent Hartree- Fock calculations for multinucleon transfer and quasifis- sion processes in the64Ni+ 238U reaction,

K. Sekizawa and K. Yabana, “Time-dependent Hartree- Fock calculations for multinucleon transfer and quasifis- sion processes in the64Ni+ 238U reaction,” Phys. Rev. C 93, 054616 (2016)

2016
[28]

Shell effects in quasi-fission for calcium induced re- actions forming thorium isotopes,

C. Simenel, A.S. Umar, K. Godbey, and P. McGlynn, “Shell effects in quasi-fission for calcium induced re- actions forming thorium isotopes,” Phys. Lett. B871, 139955 (2025)

2025
[29]

Nuclear quantum many-body dynamics (2nd edition),

C. Simenel, “Nuclear quantum many-body dynamics (2nd edition),” Eur. Phys. J A61, 181 (2025)

2025
[30]

Impact of octupole correlation on the inverse quasifission in 160Gd+ 186 W collisions,

Z. Wu, X.-X. Sun, and L. Guo, “Impact of octupole correlation on the inverse quasifission in 160Gd+ 186 W collisions,” Phys. Rev. C113, 024618 (2026)

2026
[31]

The collective model of nuclear motion,

R. E. Peierls and J. Yoccoz, “The collective model of nuclear motion,” Proc. Phys. Soc. A70, 381 (1957)

1957
[32]

Collective Motions in Nuclei by the Method of Generator Coordinates,

J. J. Griffin and J. A. Wheeler, “Collective Motions in Nuclei by the Method of Generator Coordinates,” Phys. Rev.108, 311 (1957)

1957
[33]

Time evolution of coherent ground-state correlations and the TDHF approach,

P.-G. Reinhard, R.Y. Cusson, and K. Goeke, “Time evolution of coherent ground-state correlations and the TDHF approach,” Nucl. Phys. A398, 141 (1983)

1983
[34]

The generator coordinate method and quantised collective motion in nuclear sys- tems,

P. J. Reinhard and K. Goeke, “The generator coordinate method and quantised collective motion in nuclear sys- tems,” Rep. Prog. Phys.50, 1 (1987)

1987
[35]

A critical assessment of the current imple- mentations of the Generator Coordinate Method, ac- cpeted to be published in Phys. Rev. C,

A. Bulgac, “A critical assessment of the current imple- mentations of the Generator Coordinate Method, ac- cpeted to be published in Phys. Rev. C,” (2026), arXiv:2408.02173 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2026
[36]

The Mechanism of Nuclear Fission,

N. Bohr and J. A. Wheeler, “The Mechanism of Nuclear Fission,” Phys. Rev.56, 426 (1939)

1939
[37]

Nuclear Constitution and theInterpretationofFissionPhenomena,

D. L. Hill and J. A. Wheeler, “Nuclear Constitution and theInterpretationofFissionPhenomena,” Phys.Rev.89, 1102 (1953)

1953
[38]

In- duced Fission of 240Puwithin a Real-Time Microscopic Framework,

A. Bulgac, P. Magierski, K. J. Roche, and I. Stetcu, “In- duced Fission of 240Puwithin a Real-Time Microscopic Framework,” Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 122504 (2016)

2016
[39]

Fission dynamics of240Pufrom saddle to scission and beyond,

A.Bulgac, S.Jin, K.J.Roche, N.Schunck, andI.Stetcu, “Fission dynamics of240Pufrom saddle to scission and beyond,” Phys. Rev. C100, 034615 (2019)

2019
[40]

Nuclear Fission Dy- namics: Past, Present, Needs, and Future,

A. Bulgac, S. Jin, and I. Stetcu, “Nuclear Fission Dy- namics: Past, Present, Needs, and Future,” Frontiers in Physics8, 63 (2020)

2020
[41]

Future of nuclear fission theory,

M. Bender andet al., “Future of nuclear fission theory,” J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys.47, 113002 (2020)

2020
[42]

Space-Time Approach to Non- Relativistic Quantum Mechanics,

R. P. Feynman, “Space-Time Approach to Non- Relativistic Quantum Mechanics,” Rev. Mod. Phys.20, 367 (1948)

1948
[43]

The fusion–fission and quasi-fission processes in the reaction 48Ca + 208Pb at energies near the Coulomb barrier,

E.V. Prokhorova andothers, “The fusion–fission and quasi-fission processes in the reaction 48Ca + 208Pb at energies near the Coulomb barrier,” Nucl. Phys. A802, 45 (2008). 7

2008
[44]

The LISE package: solvers for static and time-dependent superfluid local density approximation equations in three dimentions,

S. Jin, K. J. Roche, I. Stetcu, I. Abdurrahman, and A. Bulgac, “The LISE package: solvers for static and time-dependent superfluid local density approximation equations in three dimentions,” Comp. Phys. Comm. 269, 108130 (2022)

2022
[45]

N. W. Aschroft and N. D. Mermin,Solid State Physics (Saunders College, 1976)

1976
[46]

Use of the discrete variable representation basis in nuclear physics,

A. Bulgac and M. M. Forbes, “Use of the discrete variable representation basis in nuclear physics,” Phys. Rev. C87, 051301(R) (2013)

2013
[47]

New Developments in Fermionic Many-Body Physics within Time-Dependent Density Functional The- ory,

M. Kafker, “New Developments in Fermionic Many-Body Physics within Time-Dependent Density Functional The- ory,” (2025)

2025
[48]

Fission description: First steps towards a full resolution of the time-dependent Hill- Wheeler equation,

M. Verrière, N. Dubray, N. Schunck, D. Regnier, and P. Dossantos-Uzarralde, “Fission description: First steps towards a full resolution of the time-dependent Hill- Wheeler equation,” EPJ Web Conf.146, 04034 (2017)

2017
[49]

Communication in the Presence of Noise,

C.E. Shannon, “Communication in the Presence of Noise,” Proceedings of the IRE37, 10 (1949)

1949
[50]

FELIX-2.0: New version of the finite element solver for the time dependent generator coordinate method with the Gaussian overlap approximation,

D. Regnier, N. Dubray, M. Verrière, and N. Schunck, “FELIX-2.0: New version of the finite element solver for the time dependent generator coordinate method with the Gaussian overlap approximation,” Comp. Phys. Com. 225, 180 (2018)

2018
[51]

Fission fragment charge and mass distributions in 239Pu(n, f)in the adiabatic nuclear energy density func- tional theory,

D. Regnier, N. Dubray, N. Schunck, and M. Ver- rière, “Fission fragment charge and mass distributions in 239Pu(n, f)in the adiabatic nuclear energy density func- tional theory,” Phys. Rev. C93, 054611 (2016)

2016
[52]

The Time-Dependent Gen- erator Coordinate Method in Nuclear Physics,

M. Verriere and D. Regnier, “The Time-Dependent Gen- erator Coordinate Method in Nuclear Physics,” Front. Phys.8, 233 (2020)

2020
[53]

Microscopic calculation of fission product yields with particle-number projection,

M. Verriere, N. Schunck, and D. Regnier, “Microscopic calculation of fission product yields with particle-number projection,” Phys. Rev. C103, 054602 (2021)

2021
[54]

Projection of good quantum numbers for re- action fragments,

A. Bulgac, “Projection of good quantum numbers for re- action fragments,” Phys. Rev. C100, 034612 (2019)

2019
[55]

Microscopic description of pair transfer between two superfluid Fermi systems. II. Quantum mixing of time-dependent Hartree-Fock- Bogolyubov trajectories,

D. Regnier and D. Lacroix, “Microscopic description of pair transfer between two superfluid Fermi systems. II. Quantum mixing of time-dependent Hartree-Fock- Bogolyubov trajectories,” Phys. Rev. C99, 064615 (2019)

2019
[56]

Time- dependent generator coordinate method for many- particle tunneling,

N. Hasegawa, K. Hagino, and Y. Tanimura, “Time- dependent generator coordinate method for many- particle tunneling,” Phys. Lett. B808, 135693 (2020)

2020
[57]

Quantum fluc- tuations induce collective multiphonons in finite fermi liquids,

P. Marević, D. Regnier, and D. Lacroix, “Quantum fluc- tuations induce collective multiphonons in finite fermi liquids,” Phys. Rev. C108, 014620 (2023)

2023
[58]

Multiconfig- urational time-dependent density functional theory for atomic nuclei: technical and numerical aspects,

P. Marević, D. Regnier, and D. Lacroix, “Multiconfig- urational time-dependent density functional theory for atomic nuclei: technical and numerical aspects,” Eur. Phys. A60, 10 (2024)

2024
[59]

Generalized time-dependent generator coor- dinate method for small- and large-amplitude collective motion,

B. Li, D. Vretenar, T. Nikšić, P. W. Zhao, and J. Meng, “Generalized time-dependent generator coor- dinate method for small- and large-amplitude collective motion,” Phys. Rev. C108, 014321 (2023)

2023
[60]

Generalized time-dependent generator coordi- nate method for induced fission dynamics,

B. Li, D. Vretenar, T. Nikšić, J. Zhao, P. W. Zhao, and J. Meng, “Generalized time-dependent generator coordi- nate method for induced fission dynamics,” Front. Phys. 19, 44201 (2024)

2024