This paper is the first of two articles (Part I and Part II) that presents the results of the new atomic mass evaluation, Ame2012. It includes complete information on the experimental input data (including not used and rejected ones), as well as details on the evaluation procedures used to derive the tables with recommended values given in the second part. This article describes the evaluation philosophy and procedures that were implemented in the selection of specific nuclear reaction, decay and mass-spectrometer results. These input values were entered in the least-squares adjustment procedure for determining the best values for the atomic masses and their uncertainties. Calculation procedures and particularities of the Ame are then described. All accepted and rejected data, including outweighed ones, are presented in a tabular format and compared with the adjusted values (obtained using the adjustment procedure). Differences with the previous Ame2003 evaluation are also discussed and specific information is presented for several cases that may be of interest to various Ame users. The second Ame2012 article, the last one in this issue, gives a table with recommended values of atomic masses, as well as tables and graphs of derived quantities, along with the list of references used in both this Ame2012 evaluation and the Nubase2012 one (the first paper in this issue).

This paper is the first of two articles (Part I and Part II) that presents the results of the new atomic mass evaluation, Ame2016. It includes complete information on the experimental input data (also including unused and rejected ones), as well as details on the evaluation procedures used to derive the tables of recommended values given in the second part. This article describes the evaluation philosophy and procedures that were implemented in the selection of specific nuclear reaction, decay and mass-spectrometric results. These input values were entered in the least-squares adjustment for determining the best values for the atomic masses and their uncertainties. Details of the calculation and particularities of the Ame are then described. All accepted and rejected data, including outweighted ones, are presented in a tabular format and compared with the adjusted values obtained using the least-squares fit analysis. Differences with the previous Ame2012 evaluation are discussed and specific information is presented for several cases that may be of interest to Ame users. The second Ame2016 article gives a table with the recommended values of atomic masses, as well as tables and graphs of derived quantities, along with the list of references used in both the Ame2016 and the Nubase2016 evaluations (the first paper in this issue).

No abstract

Exclusive cross sections and momentum distributions have been measured for quasifree one-neutron knockout reactions from a 54 Ca beam striking on a liquid hydrogen target at ∼200 MeV=u. A significantly larger cross section to the p 3=2 state compared to the f 5=2 state observed in the excitation of 53 Ca provides direct evidence for the nature of the N ¼ 34 shell closure. This finding corroborates the arising of a new shell closure in neutron-rich calcium isotopes. The distorted-wave impulse approximation reaction formalism with shell model calculations using the effective GXPF1Bs interaction and ab initio calculations concur our experimental findings. Obtained transverse and parallel momentum distributions demonstrate the sensitivity of quasifree one-neutron knockout in inverse kinematics on a thick liquid hydrogen target with the reaction vertex reconstructed to final state spin-parity assignments.

No abstract