Paper detail

Test of statistical model cross section calculations for $α$-induced reactions on $^{107}$Ag at energies of astrophysical interest

Astrophysical reaction rates, which are mostly derived from theoretical cross sections, are necessary input to nuclear reaction network simulations for studying the origin of $p$ nuclei. Past experiments have found a considerable difference between theoretical and experimental cross sections in some cases, especially for ($α$,$γ$) reactions at low energy. Therefore, it is important to experimentally test theoretical cross section predictions at low, astrophysically relevant energies. The aim is to measure reaction cross sections of $^{107}$Ag($α$,$γ$)$^{111}$In and $^{107}$Ag($α$,n)$^{110}$In at low energies in order to extend the experimental database for astrophysical reactions involving $α$ particles towards lower mass numbers. Reaction rate predictions are very sensitive to the optical model parameters and this introduces a large uncertainty into theoretical rates involving $α$ particles at low energy. We have also used Hauser-Feshbach statistical model calculations to study the origin of possible discrepancies between prediction and data. An activation technique has been used to measure the reaction cross sections at effective center of mass energies between 7.79 MeV and 12.50 MeV. Isomeric and ground state cross sections of the ($α$,n) reaction were determined separately. The measured cross sections were found to be lower than theoretical predictions for the ($α$,$γ$) reaction. Varying the calculated averaged widths in the Hauser-Feshbach model, it became evident that the data for the ($α$,$γ$) and ($α$,n) reactions can only be simultaneously reproduced when rescaling the ratio of $γ$- to neutron width and using an energy-dependent imaginary part in the optical $α$+$^{107}$Ag potential.......

preprint2015arXivOpen 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.