Paper detail

Reply to Comment on "New physics constraints from atomic parity violation in $^{133}$Cs"

In Phys. Rev. D 103, L111303 (2021), we had reported an improved calculation of the nuclear spin-independent parity violating electric dipole transition amplitude ($E1_{PV}$) for the $6s ~ ^2S_{1/2} - 7s ~ ^2S_{1/2}$ transition in $^{133}$Cs by employing a relativistic coupled-cluster (RCC) theory. In a recent Comment, B. M. Roberts and J. S. M. Ginges have raised questions about our calculation of the so-called Core contribution to $E1_{PV}$. Our result for this contribution does not agree with theirs, but is in agreement with results from previous calculations where this contribution is given explicitly. In our reply, we explain in detail the validity of the evaluation of our core contribution. We emphasize that the Main, Core and Tail contributions have been treated on an equal footing in our work unlike the sum-over-states calculations. We also address their concerns about our approximate treatment of the contributions from the QED corrections, which was not the aim of our work, but was carried out for completeness. Nonetheless, conclusion of our above mentioned paper is not going to affect if we replace our estimated QED contribution to $E1_{PV}$ by earlier estimation.

preprint2022arXivOpen 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.