Paper detail

$α$ Decay Half-life Estimation and Uncertainty Analysis

The non-parametric bootstrap method is used to evaluate the uncertainties of two $α$ decay formulas, the universal decay law (UDL) and the new Geiger-Nuttall law (NGNL). Such a method can simultaneously obtain the uncertainty of each parameter, the correlation between each pair of parameters, and the total, statistical, and systematic uncertainties of each formula. Both even-even (ee) nuclei and odd-A (oA) nuclei are used in the analysis. The collected data are separated into three parts: ee nuclei, oA nuclei without spin or parity change (oA\_nc), and oA nuclei with spin and/or parity change (oA\_c). Based on the residues between observed data and corresponding calculations, the statistical and systematic uncertainties are decomposed from the total uncertainty, from which one can clarify the effects from the shell structure, pairing, and angular momentum change on describing $α$ decay half-life. If $N > 126$ and $N \leqslant 126$ nuclei are considered together, the systematic uncertainty of residues between observed and predicted half-lives are larger than if those groups are considered separately. Without shell correction term, a much larger systematic uncertainty is found if parameters obtained for $N \leqslant 126$ nuclei are used to describe the half-lives of $N > 126$ nuclei. A global hindrance on the $α$ decay process is found in oA\_nc (oA\_c) nuclei comparing with ee (oA\_nc) nuclei. If parameters obtained from ee (oA\_nc) nuclei are used, the half-lives of oA\_nc (oA\_c) nuclei are generally underestimated with large systematic uncertainties, which can be related to the contribution of pairing effect and angular momentum. The recently observed superallowed decay from $^{104}$Te to $^{100}$Sn is also discussed based on uncertainty analysis. (Abstract is not fully presented because of length limitation)

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.