Paper detail

Adiabatic versus Faddeev for (d,p) and (p,d) reactions

The finite range adiabatic wave approximation provides a practical method to analyze (d,p) or (p,d) reactions, however until now the level of accuracy obtained in the description of the reaction dynamics has not been determined. In this work, we perform a systematic comparison between the finite range adiabatic wave approximation and the exact Faddeev method. We include studies of $^{11}$Be(p,d)$^{10}$Be(g.s.) at $E_p=$5, 10 and 35 MeV; $^{12}$C(d,p)$^{13}$C(g.s.) at $E_d=$7, 12 and 56 MeV and $^{48}$Ca(d,p)$^{49}$Ca(g.s.) at $E_d=$19, 56 and 100 MeV. Results show that the two methods agree within $\approx 5%$ for a range of beam energies ($E_d \approx 20-40$ MeV) but differences increase significantly for very low energies and for the highest energies. Our tests show that ADWA agrees best with Faddeev when the angular momentum transfer is small $Δl=0$ and when the neutron-nucleus system is loosely bound.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.