2012 Vol. 36, No. 12
Display Method: |
2012, 36(12): 1157-1286. doi: 10.1088/1674-1137/36/12/001
Abstract:
This paper presents the NUBASE2012 evaluation that contains the recommended values for nuclear and decay properties of nuclides in their ground and excited isomeric (T1/2≥100 ns) states. All nuclides for which some experimental information is known are considered. NUBASE2012 covers all up to date experimental data published in primary (journal articles) and secondary (mainly laboratory reports and conference proceedings) references, together with the corresponding bibliographical information. During the development of NUBASE2012, the data available in the “Evaluated Nuclear Structure Data File” (ENSDF) database were consulted, and critically assessed of their validity and completeness. Furthermore, a large amount of new and somewhat older experimental results that were missing in ENSDF were compiled, evaluated and included in NUBASE2012. The atomic mass values were taken from the “Atomic Mass Evaluation” (AME2012, second and third parts of the present issue). In cases where no experimental data were available for a particular nuclide, trends in the behavior of specific properties in neighboring nuclei (TNN) were examined. This approach allowed to estimate, whenever possible, values for a range of properties, and are labeled in NUBASE2012 as “non-experimental” (flagged “#”). Evaluation procedures and policies that were used during the development of this database are presented, together with a detailed table of recommended values and their uncertainties.
This paper presents the NUBASE2012 evaluation that contains the recommended values for nuclear and decay properties of nuclides in their ground and excited isomeric (T1/2≥100 ns) states. All nuclides for which some experimental information is known are considered. NUBASE2012 covers all up to date experimental data published in primary (journal articles) and secondary (mainly laboratory reports and conference proceedings) references, together with the corresponding bibliographical information. During the development of NUBASE2012, the data available in the “Evaluated Nuclear Structure Data File” (ENSDF) database were consulted, and critically assessed of their validity and completeness. Furthermore, a large amount of new and somewhat older experimental results that were missing in ENSDF were compiled, evaluated and included in NUBASE2012. The atomic mass values were taken from the “Atomic Mass Evaluation” (AME2012, second and third parts of the present issue). In cases where no experimental data were available for a particular nuclide, trends in the behavior of specific properties in neighboring nuclei (TNN) were examined. This approach allowed to estimate, whenever possible, values for a range of properties, and are labeled in NUBASE2012 as “non-experimental” (flagged “#”). Evaluation procedures and policies that were used during the development of this database are presented, together with a detailed table of recommended values and their uncertainties.
2012, 36(12): 1287-1602. doi: 10.1088/1674-1137/36/12/002
Abstract:
This paper is the first of two articles (Part I and Part II) that presents the results of the new atomic mass evaluation, AME2012. It includes complete information on the experimental input data (including not used and rejected ones), as well as details on the evaluation procedures used to derive the tables with recommended values given in the second part. This article describes the evaluation philosophy and procedures that were implemented in the selection of specific nuclear reaction, decay and mass-spectrometer results. These input values were entered in the least-squares adjustment procedure for determining the best values for the atomic masses and their uncertainties. Calculation procedures and particularities of the AME are then described. All accepted and rejected data, including outweighed ones, are presented in a tabular format and compared with the adjusted values (obtained using the adjustment procedure). Differences with the previous AME2003 evaluation are also discussed and specific information is presented for several cases that may be of interest to various AME users. The second AME2012 article, the last one in this issue, gives a table with recommended values of atomic masses, as well as tables and graphs of derived quantities, along with the list of references used in both this AME2012 evaluation and the NUBASE2012 one (the first paper in this issue).
This paper is the first of two articles (Part I and Part II) that presents the results of the new atomic mass evaluation, AME2012. It includes complete information on the experimental input data (including not used and rejected ones), as well as details on the evaluation procedures used to derive the tables with recommended values given in the second part. This article describes the evaluation philosophy and procedures that were implemented in the selection of specific nuclear reaction, decay and mass-spectrometer results. These input values were entered in the least-squares adjustment procedure for determining the best values for the atomic masses and their uncertainties. Calculation procedures and particularities of the AME are then described. All accepted and rejected data, including outweighed ones, are presented in a tabular format and compared with the adjusted values (obtained using the adjustment procedure). Differences with the previous AME2003 evaluation are also discussed and specific information is presented for several cases that may be of interest to various AME users. The second AME2012 article, the last one in this issue, gives a table with recommended values of atomic masses, as well as tables and graphs of derived quantities, along with the list of references used in both this AME2012 evaluation and the NUBASE2012 one (the first paper in this issue).
2012, 36(12): 1603-2014. doi: 10.1088/1674-1137/36/12/003
Abstract:
This paper is the second part of the new evaluation of atomic masses, AME2012. From the results of a leastsquares calculation, described in Part I, for all accepted experimental data, we derive here tables and graphs to replace those of AME2003. The first table lists atomic masses. It is followed by a table of the influences of data on primary nuclides, a table of separation energies and reaction energies, and finally, a series of graphs of separation and decay energies. The last section in this paper lists all references to the input data used in Part I of this AME2012 and also to the data included in the NUBASE2012 evaluation (first paper in this issue).
This paper is the second part of the new evaluation of atomic masses, AME2012. From the results of a leastsquares calculation, described in Part I, for all accepted experimental data, we derive here tables and graphs to replace those of AME2003. The first table lists atomic masses. It is followed by a table of the influences of data on primary nuclides, a table of separation energies and reaction energies, and finally, a series of graphs of separation and decay energies. The last section in this paper lists all references to the input data used in Part I of this AME2012 and also to the data included in the NUBASE2012 evaluation (first paper in this issue).
IF: 3.6
Monthly founded in 1977
Sponsored by:
ISSN 1674-1137 CN 11-5641/O4
Original research articles, Ietters and reviews Covering theory and experiments in the fieids of
- Particle physics
- Nuclear physics
- Particle and nuclear astrophysics
- Cosmology
Author benefits
- A SCOAP3 participating journal - free Open Access publication for qualifying articles
- Average 24 days to first decision
- Fast-track publication for selected articles
- Subscriptions at over 3000 institutions worldwide
- Free English editing on all accepted articles
News
- Chinese Physics C Outstanding Reviewer Award 2023
- Impact factor of Chinese Physics C is 3.6 in 2022
- 2022 CPC Outstanding Reviewer Awards
- The 2023 Chinese New Year-Office closure
- ãChinese Physics CãBEST PAPER AWARDS 2022
Cover Story
- Cover Story (Issue 4, 2024) | Advancing gravitational wave astronomy: AI-enhanced detection and real-time analysis in the presence of glitches
- Cover Story (Issue 3, 2024) | First measurement of the ground-state mass of 22Al helpsto evaluate the ab-initio theory
- Cover Story (Issue 2, 2024) | Quark/gluon taggers light the way to new physics
- Cover story (Issue 6, 2023) ï½Joint constraints on cosmological parameters using future multi-band gravitational wave standard siren observations
- Cover Story (Issue 5, 2023) | Production and decay of polarized hyperon-antihyperon pairs
Advertising
