2006
DOI: 10.1103/physrevc.74.034329
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Nuclearg-factor measurements of the92and

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
2
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
2
2

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
1
2
1
Order By: Relevance
“…It is also notable that, from a g-factor measurement, Thakur et al [11] reported a half-life of 132(3) ns, in reasonable agreement with our value of 148 (9) ns. However, their use of NaI detectors, combined with their assumption of incorrect γ -ray energies from André et al, could render their analysis unreliable.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 81%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…It is also notable that, from a g-factor measurement, Thakur et al [11] reported a half-life of 132(3) ns, in reasonable agreement with our value of 148 (9) ns. However, their use of NaI detectors, combined with their assumption of incorrect γ -ray energies from André et al, could render their analysis unreliable.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 81%
“…For this configuration, the Nilsson model g-factor calculation gives g K = 1.11, in satisfactory agreement with the experimental value of 1.25 (12). However, there is again disagreement with Thakur et al [11], who reported g K = 0.63(1) and hypothesised configuration mixing to explain their low value. In particular, they suggest a 61% component [19] and 175 Ta [20].…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 48%
See 2 more Smart Citations