Paper detail

Systematic calculations of $α$-decay half-lives with an improved empirical formula

Based on the recent data in NUBASE2012, an improved empirical formula for evaluating the $α$-decay half-lives is presented, in which the hindrance effect resulted from the change of the ground state spins and parities of parent and daughter nuclei is included, together with a new correction factor for nuclei near the shell closures. The calculated $α$-decay half-lives are found to be in better agreements with the experimental data, and the corresponding root-mean-square (rms) deviation is reduced to $0.433$ when the experimental $Q$-values are employed. Furthermore, the $Q$-values derived from different nuclear mass models are used to predict $α$-decay half-lives with this improved formula. It is found that the calculated half-lives are very sensitive to the $Q$-values. Remarkably, when mass predictions are improved with the radial basis function (RBF), the resulting rms deviations can be significantly reduced. With the mass prediction from the latest version of Weizsäcker-Skyrme (WS4) model, the rms deviation of $α$-decay half-lives with respect to the known data falls to $0.697$.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 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.