Paper detail

Empirical pairing gaps, shell effects, and di-neutron spatial correlation in neutron-rich nuclei

The empirical pairing gaps derived from four different odd-even mass staggering formulas are compared. By performing single-$j$ shell and multi-shell seniority model calculations as well as by using the standard HFB approach with Skyrme force we show that the simplest three-point formula $Δ_C^ {(3)}(N)=\frac{1}{2}\left[B(N,Z)+B(N-2,Z)-2B(N-1,Z)\right]$ can provide a good measure of the neutron pairing gap in even-$N$ nuclei. It removes to a large extent the contribution from the nuclear mean field as well as contributions from shell structure details. It is also less contaminated by the Wigner effect for nuclei around $N=Z$. We also show that the strength of $Δ^ {(3)}_C(N)$ can serve as a good indication of the two-particle spatial correlation in the nucleus of concern and that the weakening of $Δ^ {(3)}_C(N)$ in some neutron-rich nuclei indicates that the di-neutron correlation itself is weak in these nuclei.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

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.