2017
DOI: 10.1007/s00601-017-1273-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Benchmark Results for Few-Body Hypernuclei

Abstract: The Non-Symmetrized Hyperspherical Harmonics method (NSHH) is introduced in the hypernuclear sector and benchmarked with three different ab-initio methods, namely the Auxiliary Field Diffusion Monte Carlo method, the Faddeev-Yakubovsky approach and the Gaussian Expansion Method. Binding energies and hyperon separation energies of three-to five-body hypernuclei are calculated by employing the two-body ΛN component of the phenomenological Bodmer-Usmani potential [1], and a hyperon-nucleon interaction [2] simulat… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
10
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
1
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…By inspection of Table XII, we can conclude that B = 2.280 MeV, with an accuracy of about 3 keV, obtained with G max = 100, N max = 34, and j max = 14. By inspection of Table XIII The results obtained with our method for the three potential models considered in this work are compared with those present in the literature [18,19,21] in Table XIV, finding a very nice agreement, within the reached accuracy. [18], using G max = 20, jmax = 8 and γ = 4 fm −1 .…”
Section: The 3 λ H Hypernucleussupporting
confidence: 73%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…By inspection of Table XII, we can conclude that B = 2.280 MeV, with an accuracy of about 3 keV, obtained with G max = 100, N max = 34, and j max = 14. By inspection of Table XIII The results obtained with our method for the three potential models considered in this work are compared with those present in the literature [18,19,21] in Table XIV, finding a very nice agreement, within the reached accuracy. [18], using G max = 20, jmax = 8 and γ = 4 fm −1 .…”
Section: The 3 λ H Hypernucleussupporting
confidence: 73%
“…The Λ hyperon mass has been chosen depending on the considered potential. We remind that we have used three different potential models: a central spin-independent Gaussian model [18], and two spin-dependent central potentials, labelled MN9 [19] and AU [21] potentials. Therefore, when the 3 Λ H hypernucleus has been studied using the Gaussian potential of Ref.…”
Section: The 3 λ H Hypernucleusmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Usually the LECs of the NNN interaction are fixed to reproduce the binding energy of light ( 3 H, 3 He and 4 He) nuclei but also other choices are possible. In the hypernuclear sector the situation is more complicated due to the lack of enough experimental data and to the few existing ab-initio calculations in light hypernuclei [20,45,46,54,55]. In Ref.…”
Section: The Nnλ Interactionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the benchmark calculation of [11] bound baryon systems from three up to five particles are considered, where one of the baryons is the Λ hyperon which has strangeness S = −1. As already mentioned in the introduction the experimental information about the YN interaction is still rather scarce.…”
Section: Strange Baryon Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other hand, our present aim is not yet a realistic calculation of the binding energy of hypernuclei, but rather a check of the precision of the ab initio method used by us. Therefore in [11] calculations with non-fully realistic interactions models are made. Before coming to some of these results in section 3.2, first, a short description of the ab initio method of our choice is given in the following section.…”
Section: Strange Baryon Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%