2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2010.01.234
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Updated results on the 11ΛB and 12ΛC γ-ray spectroscopy study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Assignments for the lower part of the spectrum, shown in Fig. 16, have been confirmed from an analysis of the three γ-rays seen following proton emission from 12 Λ C (Ma et al, 2010). The main failing of the shell-model calculation is that it does not produce high enough excitation energies for the 11 Λ B states based on the 1 + ; 0 states of 10 B at 0.72 and 2.15 MeV (Millener, 2010).…”
Section: The Effective Y N Interactionmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…Assignments for the lower part of the spectrum, shown in Fig. 16, have been confirmed from an analysis of the three γ-rays seen following proton emission from 12 Λ C (Ma et al, 2010). The main failing of the shell-model calculation is that it does not produce high enough excitation energies for the 11 Λ B states based on the 1 + ; 0 states of 10 B at 0.72 and 2.15 MeV (Millener, 2010).…”
Section: The Effective Y N Interactionmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…The experimental data available at the time was reviewed by Tamura in the same volume [2] and consisted of 22 γ-ray transitions in Λ C from KEK E566 using an upgraded germanium detector array, Hyperball2, have been reported at the Hyp-X conference by Tamura [3] and Ma [4]. The groundstate doublet spacing in 12 Λ C is established as 161 keV both from the direct observation of the 161 keV γ-ray and from transitions from an excited 1 − state at 2832 keV.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The values of E e , P E Arm , P H Arm , φ E Arm , and φ H Arm were thus the same in the productions of both 9 Λ Li and 12 Λ B and were determined by positioning the 12 Λ B ground state at its known position of 11.37 ± 0.06 MeV [31] in the binding-energy spectrum and minimizing its FWHM. When minimizing the 12 Λ B ground-state FWHM, it has to be taken into account that this ground state is actually a doublet whose energy splitting, assumed to be equal to the 12 Λ C ground-state energy splitting, is 161.6 ± 0.2 keV [34,35]. Minimizing the Λ B ground state peak FWHM produces only second order effects on the position of the peaks in the binding-energy spectrum and was peformed mainly to choose the right set of values ∆E e , ∆P E Arm , and ∆P H Arm among the ∞ 2 sets of values that produced the desired value of S. Things are much different for the reaction p(e, e ′ K + )Λ, where the target mass is small and the minimization of the FWHM of the peak (which is a single peak) plays a role as important as the positioning of the peak in the binding-energy spectrum to its zero value.…”
Section: −1mentioning
confidence: 99%