Absolute transition probabilities of Cu II lines

The Cu II Spectrum

“…They are proportional to the energy flux under the line profile and have uncertainties of a factor of three on average. Intensities of parity-forbidden transitions are given on a different scale, since most of them were observed only in nebulas; e Line character code: bl-blended line; p-perturbed by a close line; *-the given intensity value is shared by two or more transitions; m-masked by another strong line (no wavelength measurement available);-the value given in the observed wavelength column is a rounded Ritz wavelength (no wavelength measurement available); ?-questionable identification; f Transition probability accuracy code: A+-transition probability uncertainty is likely ≤2%; B+-≤7%; B-≤7%; C+-≤18%; C-≤25%; D-≤50%; E->50%; g Key to observed wavelength and transition probability references: A73-Aller et al [4]; A08-Andersson et al [40]; B00-Biémont et al [41]; B09-Brown et al [42]; C84-Cederquist et al [43]; C94-Crespo López-Urrutia et al [44]; D05-Dong and Fritzsche [45]; G64-Garstang [46]; H71-Hefferlin et al [47]; K66-Kaufman and Ward [15]; K82-Kono and Hattori [48]; M97-McKenna et al [5]; N88-Neger and Jäger [49]; O07-Ortiz et al [50]; P84-Prior [37]; P97-Pinnington et al [51]; R1-Ross [2]; R2-Ross [16]; S36-Shenstone [1]; T53-Thackeray [3]; W93-Wagatsuma and Hirokawa [36]; F-this work, FTS measurements with Cu/Ge/Pt/Ar hollow cathode; F_Re-this work, measurements with Cu/Re/Ar hollow cathode; TW-this work, grating measurements. Lower-case letters after the reference have the following meaning: c-corrected in this work; n-new identification; r-revised identification; cal-calculated A-value; se-A-value was semiempirically adjusted by ratio of observed and calculated lifetime; h Notes: X-excluded from level-optimization procedure; L-lasing line; M1-magnetic-dipole transition; E2-electric-quadrupole transition; HF-hyperfine-induced transition.…”

“…Further expansion of the reference data set was provided by results of Crespo López-Urrutia et al [44] obtained by combining their own measurements of emission branching fractions with radiative lifetimes measured in other studies. From this work, the results obtained using the lifetimes reliably measured by Cederquist et al [43] and by Kono and Hattori [48] were used without adjustments.…”

“…However, for several transitions we re-normalized their results to lifetimes more accurately measured by Pinnington et al [51]. Uncertainties of Crespo López-Urrutia et al [44] were estimated by combining in quadrature systematic contributions from the uncertainties of the lifetimes and statistical uncertainties, which we estimated to vary from less than 5% for the strongest lines to 90% for the weakest lines, which we assumed to have a signal-to-noise ratio about 1.…”

“…Instead, they used all of their data, both experimental and theoretical, together, and adjusted the resulting A-values to satisfy the J-file sum rule. We renormalized several of their reported A-values to radiative lifetimes measured more accurately by Brown et al [42], Pinnington et al [51], and Cederquist et al [43] and estimated the uncertainties by a method similar to the one described above in evaluation of results of Crespo López-Urrutia et al [44].…”

Transition rates and transition rate diagrams in atomic emission spectroscopy: A review

“…But the estimated collision rate between e.g. a copper ion and argon atoms at typical conditions in the Grimm-type glow discharge is~1.1 × 10 6 s − 1 and the transition probability of the Cu II, 224.700 nm emission line, which alone is responsible for~90% of radiative de-excitations of the Cu II levels presumably excited by Ar + -ACT, is 3.3 × 10 8 s − 1 , according to Refs [59,60]. This means that only ≈ 3% of the Cu +⁎ ions created by Ar + -ACT suffer a collision with an argon atom before they decay.…”