Relativistic calculations for M1-type transitions in configurations of W29+–W37+ ions

A theoretical survey of atomic structure and forbidden transitions in the 4pkand 4dkground configurations of tungsten ions W29 +through W43 +

“…Questionable experimental wavelengths or line identifications in Radtke et al (2007) were also highlighted by Jonauskas et al (2010) figure 2, we compare the wavelengths calculated in this work for forbidden lines in the 4d k configurations with those computed by Radtke et al (2007) using the Hebrew University Lawrence Livermore Atomic Code (HULLAC) package and with those calculated by Jonauskas et al (2010) (Aymar et al 1970, Klapisch 1971, Klapisch et al 1977. The transition probabilities deduced from these gf -values are also listed in Jonauskas et al (2012) who used the MCDF method implemented in the GRASP2K code (Fischer et al 2006, Jönsson et al 2007. In the latter study, large discrepancies were obtained for radiative probabilities in comparison with previous FAC data of Jonauskas et al (2010), the differences reaching even up to a factor of 3 for some lines.…”

“…Magnetic dipole transitions between levels of the 4d k ground configurations of tungsten ions W 29+ through W 37+ were analysed using large-scale configuration interaction methods by Jonauskas et al (2010) who reported theoretical wavelengths and transition probabilities for a limited number (45) of lines between 44 and 98 nm. Finally, very recently, relativistic calculations for M1 transitions in the 4d k configurations of W 29+ -W 37+ ions using the GRASP2K code were carried out by Jonauskas et al (2012) who observed large discrepancies with theoretical transition probabilities previously published.…”

“…This method was used in an ab initio way with the same sets of configurations as those used in our MCDF calculations and listed in Jonauskas et al (2010). In contrast, the new GRASP2K A-values of Jonauskas et al (2012) show large discrepancies with all of the other three approaches in many cases. In their paper, the latter authors claimed that these discrepancies were essentially due to the larger multiconfiguration basis used in their physical models.…”

“…To verify this, we performed further HFR calculations using an extended set of configurations in two particular ions, i.e. W 29+ and W 37+ for which the GRASP2K A-values of Jonauskas et al (2012) are respectively a factor of 1.5 smaller and 1.5 larger than our values (obtained with both MCDF and HFR methods) and FAC values published by Jonauskas et al (2010). More precisely, for these two ions, the lists of interacting configurations given in table 1 were completed by additional configurations chosen among those having the largest configuration interaction strengths with 4d k as estimated by Jonauskas et al (2010 k+2 .…”

Metastable level properties of the excited configuration 4p64d84f

“…As it was concluded in [2], the parameters of high multipole order radiative transitions and the radiative lifetimes of metastable levels were "essential building blocks in radiative-collisional models simulating spectra". Traditionally, the radiative lifetimes for the excited metastable levels of the ground configuration are determined from the calculated electric quadrupole (E2) and magnetic dipole (M1) transition probabilities, see [3,9,10,11]. These types of radiative transitions also can be important when the radiative lifetimes of the levels of excited configurations are calculated [1,6,5].…”