1971
DOI: 10.1103/physrevc.3.1715
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Study of Approximations in the Nuclear Pairing-Force Problem

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

1985
1985
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As already noted some times ago [17] and recently rediscussed [16,18], the two-body part V can be treated perturbatively to provide an accurate description of the pairing problem in the weak pairing interaction regime. Starting from the ground state |Φ 0 of H 0 , that corresponds to the Slater determinant obtained by occupying the lowest single-particle states while other excited states |Φ n of H 0 can be obtained by considering particle-hole (p-h), 2p-2h, ... excitations built on top of the |Φ 0 .…”
Section: Standard Perturbation Theorymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…As already noted some times ago [17] and recently rediscussed [16,18], the two-body part V can be treated perturbatively to provide an accurate description of the pairing problem in the weak pairing interaction regime. Starting from the ground state |Φ 0 of H 0 , that corresponds to the Slater determinant obtained by occupying the lowest single-particle states while other excited states |Φ n of H 0 can be obtained by considering particle-hole (p-h), 2p-2h, ... excitations built on top of the |Φ 0 .…”
Section: Standard Perturbation Theorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[18] using a different approach based on the Richardson-Gaudin equation. It is known [16,17] that standard perturbation theory provides an appropriate description in the weak coupling regime. In figure 1, an example of standard perturbation theory (SPT) is presented for the N = 8 particles and constant coupling case, i.e.…”
Section: Standard Perturbation Theorymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The results of the BCS approximation, the LN prescription and the DMC and Metropolis projection methods (MCP) using v j and u j either from BCS (MCP BCS ) or LN (MCP LN M ) calculations are compared against exact results in Table I for Ω = 10 and N = 4, 10 for several values of the interaction strength, G. It is shown that Metropolis Projection methods give very good agreement with the exact results (the same quality of agreement as the DMC method). Recall that for N = Ω the BCS ansatz always have a nontrivial minimum 19 . For N = Ω, a nontrivial solution is found only for G greater than 1/(N − 1).…”
Section: A the Symmetric Two-level Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[1][2][3]. While the Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer (BCS) and the more refined Hartree-Fock-Bogolyubov (HFB) approximations provide a simple and clear demonstration of the role of pairing correlations in nuclei [2,4,5], tremendous efforts have been made in finding accurate solutions to the problem [6][7][8][9][10][11] to overcome serious drawbacks in the BCS and the HFB, such as spurious states, nonorthogonal solutions, etc., resulting from particle number-nonconservation effects in these approximations [9,[11][12][13]. It is known that either spherical or deformed mean-field plus the standard pairing interaction can be solved exactly by using the Gaudin-Richardson method [14][15][16].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%