Paper detail

Rotational excitations in rare-earth nuclei: a comparative study within three cranking models with different mean fields and the treatments of pairing correlations

High-spin rotational bands in rare-earth Er ($Z=68$), Tm ($Z=69$) and Yb ($Z=70$) isotopes are investigated by three different nuclear models. These are (i) the cranked relativistic Hartree-Bogoliubov (CRHB) approach with approximate particle number projection by means of the Lipkin-Nogami (LN) method, (ii) the cranking covariant density functional theory (CDFT) with pairing correlations treated by a shell-model-like approach (SLAP) or the so called particle-number conserving (PNC) method, and (iii) cranked shell model (CSM) based on the Nilsson potential with pairing correlations treated by the PNC method. A detailed comparison between these three models in the description of the ground state rotational bands of even-even Er and Yb isotopes is performed. The similarities and differences between these models in the description of the moments of inertia, the features of band crossings, equilibrium deformations and pairing energies of even-even nuclei under study are discussed. These quantities are considered as a function of rotational frequency and proton and neutron numbers. The changes in the properties of the first band crossings with increasing neutron number in this mass region are investigated. On average, a comparable accuracy of the description of available experimental data is achieved in these models. However, the differences between model predictions become larger above the first band crossings. Because of time-consuming nature of numerical calculations in the CDFT-based models, a systematic study of the rotational properties of both ground state and excited state bands in odd-mass Tm nuclei is carried out only by the PNC-SCM. With few exceptions, the rotational properties of experimental 1-quasiparticle and 3-quasiparticle bands in $^{165,167,169,171}$Tm are reproduced reasonably well.

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.