-
Within the IPM, the key point is that a single nucleon motion is governed by the average field produced by all other nucleons. As is well known, the harmonic oscillator (HO) mean field combined with the SO coupling term was the first successful mean field treatment, predicting the correct sequence of energy levels and magic numbers [12]. However, currently, the subjects of nuclear physics have expanded far beyond the valley of stability into the broader region of nuclide chart, such as neutron rich exotic nuclei. At this time, the continuum spectrum of the mean field potential appears to be indispensable, whereas the outer part of the HO potential cannot take this responsibility. Moreover, in reality, one may expect the SO coupling to be reduced for neutron dripline nuclei with a diffusive nuclear surface because the SO interaction peaks at the surface of nuclei. This cannot be achieved by the gradient of the HO potential involved in the coefficient of the SO term either. Hence, the more realistic WS potential, a common choice in modern nuclear theoretical techniques [10, 13, 14], is taken to describe the single particle shell structure. As additional information, statistical correlation analysis was performed very recently to refine the parameterization of the mean-field Hamiltonian of WS type, serving the nuclear shape description [15].
After the subtle modifications via considering the reduced mass and the isospin symmetry [10], the total effective single-nucleon Hamiltonian reads as
$ H = \frac{p^2}{2\mu}+V(r)+V_{c}(r)+\frac{\hbar^2}{2\mu c^2r}\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\widetilde V(r)\right) \boldsymbol{L}\cdot\boldsymbol{S}. $
(1) The first term is the single-nucleon kinetic energy, and
$ \mu $ is the reduced mass of the nucleon-core system. Based on the lowest order isospin invariant, the effective nuclear potential,$ V(r) $ , related with the scalar product of the isospin of the nucleon, t, and the core, T', is taken as [16]$ V(r) = -Vf(r,R,a),\quad V = V_0\left(1-\frac{4\kappa}{A}\langle\boldsymbol{t}\cdot\boldsymbol{T}^{'}\rangle\right), $
(2) where
$ V_0 $ is the strength parameter of the nuclear potential. The coefficient$ \kappa $ regulates the isospin dependent term of the nuclear potential, tuning the depth of the nuclear potential as well. As mentioned in Ref. [10], the value of$ \kappa $ is positive after the "minus" sign choice in the above formula, which is consistent with conventions [10, 12, 17, 18]. By combining the relationship, t + T′ = T, and the assumption that the isospin number is$ T = |T_z| = |N-Z|/2 $ for the ground state of one nucleus, the behavior of −4〈t·T′〉 is then determined as$-4\left\langle \boldsymbol{t}\cdot \boldsymbol{T}' \right\rangle =\left\{ \begin{matrix} \begin{align} & 3, \\ & \pm (N-Z+1)+2, \\ & \pm (N-Z-1)+2, \\ \end{align} & \begin{matrix} N=Z, \\ N\geqslant Z, \\ N\leqslant Z. \\ \end{matrix} \\ \end{matrix} \right. $
(3) Here, the upper and lower signs denote a proton and a neutron, respectively. Such a modified isospin dependence, introduced in the nuclear mean-field potential, can lead to interestingly different spectra for light nuclei around
$ N = Z $ [10]. The Coulomb potential,$ V_c(r) $ , corresponding to a nucleon electromagnetically interacting with a uniformly charged sphere of radius$ R_c $ , is given by$ V_c(r) = \frac{Z^{'}e^2}{4\pi\varepsilon_0}\left\{ \begin{aligned}\dfrac{3}{2R_c},\quad& r \leqslant R_c, \\ \dfrac{1}{r}, \quad\quad& r \geqslant R_c, \end{aligned} \right. $
(4) where
$ Z^{'} $ is the proton number of the core nucleus. As for the last SO coupling term, the potential,$ \widetilde V(r) $ , is supposed to be not equal to the original potential,$ V(r) $ , along with a different form factor [10]. Consequently, the form of$ \widetilde V(r) $ is constructed as$ \widetilde{V}(r) = -\widetilde{V}f(r,R_{\rm so},a_{\rm so}), \quad \widetilde{V} = \lambda V_0\left(1-\frac{4\kappa_{\rm so}}{A}\langle\boldsymbol{t}\cdot\boldsymbol{T}^{'}\rangle\right), $
(5) The characteristic function,
$ f(r,R,a) $ , as suggested by Woods and Saxon [13], has the Fermi form,$ f(r,R,a) = \left[1+\exp\left(\frac{r-R}{a}\right)\right]^{-1}, $
(6) where the size parameter,
$ R $ , and the surface diffuseness,$ a $ , are to be determined. Following the conventional choice of the WS potential parameterization, the size and diffuseness parameters are regulated by$ R = R_c = R_0A^{1/3} $ ,$ R_{\rm so} = R_{0, {\rm so}}A^{1/3} $ , and$ a = a_{\rm so} $ . As mentioned before, the isospin dependence in the mean-field NN potential appears to be increasingly important toward unstable nuclei with extreme neutron-proton ratios. More specifically, the strength of the single-particle SO potential may be enhanced in neutron-rich nuclei [12], whereas the reduced SO splitting, sometimes regarded as "shell quenching," is expected to be due to the damping of the radial nucleon density [7]. In this sense, to somewhat explore this debate and probe into the evolution of a single particle shell, one should pay special attention to the key isospin-related parameters,$ \kappa $ and$ \kappa_{\rm so} $ , in the strength of the central and SO interactions, respectively. In order to systematically investigate the isospin effect in the SPE evolution, three kinds of calculations with$ \kappa_{\rm so} = \pm\kappa, 0 $ are performed here with the GAMOW code [19], corresponding to the strengthened, weakened, and unchanged SO channel of the single-particle potential. It is worth noting that the unconventional negative$ \kappa_{\rm so} $ was discussed by Isakov et al. [20] in terms of the nature of two-body SO forces via the isovector dominance (see also supplemental materials in Ref. [7]). Similar to the global optimization procedure in Ref. [21], all above parameters in the single particle Hamiltonian are adjusted to single particle and single hole states in the vicinity of doubly magic nuclei$ ^{16}_{8} $ O,$ ^{40}_{20} $ Ca,$ ^{48}_{20} $ Ca,$ ^{100}_{50} $ Sn,$ ^{132}_{50} $ Sn, and$ ^{208}_{82} $ Pb, as listed in Refs. [10, 20]. In Table 1, the parameter set obtained in this study is presented and compared with other theoretical results for different cases of$ \kappa $ and$ \kappa_{\rm so} $ . One worthwhile point is that there are slight discrepancies between the present parameters and other reported values despite the same treatment of$ \kappa $ and$ \kappa_{\rm so} $ . This is actually common in the model fitting process, which is tackled in the model uncertainty evaluations via statistical methods [15].V0/MeV ro/fm r0,so/fm a = aso/fm λ κ Present 51.47 1.278 1.165 0.654 23.165 0.644 $\kappa_{\rm so} = \kappa$ Ref. [17] 51 1.27 1.27 0.67 32.13 0.647 $\kappa_{\rm so} = \kappa$ Ref. [18] 49.6 1.374(n)/1.275(p) 1.31(n)/1.32(p) 0.7 35(n)/36(p) 0.86 $\kappa_{\rm so} = \kappa$ Present 51.25 1.283 1.076 0.637 20.716 0.640 $\kappa_{\rm so} = -\kappa$ Ref. [12] 50.92 1.285 1.146 0.691 24.07 0.644 $\kappa_{\rm so} = -\kappa$ Present 51.40 1.279 1.129 0.647 22.112 0.643 $\kappa_{\rm so} = 0$ Ref. [10] 52.06 1.26 1.16 0.662 24.1 0.639 $\kappa_{\rm so} = 0$ Table 1. WS potential parameters obtained by fitting to the available single-particle and single-hole states around doubly-magic nuclei with restriction
$\kappa_{\rm so} = \pm\kappa,0$ and comparison with existing parameterizations.Before proceeding with the detailed results, it is necessary to point out the novelties of the present study compared with previous ones [10, 12]. The main objective of Ref. [10] was a systematical investigation on the WS-type single particle potential serving a many-body microscopic calculation, whereas the shell evolution behavior was pursued in Ref. [12] and this study. Moreover, the total energy surface of specific nuclei and the related shape coexistence were carefully examined in Ref. [12]. However, the detailed analysis on the evolution of shell structure is relatively-lacking despite the indication of the emergence and absence of magic numbers. In the present study, we focus on a comparative analysis between the SPE evolutions in this IPM picture and those from the interacting shell model (dominance of the tensor force) [8, 10] in detail, through a comprehensive choice of the isospin-related parameters, namely,
$ \kappa $ and$ \kappa_{\rm so} $ . This is significantly different from the content of Ref. [12], and should be useful for the refinement of the monopole channel of the NN interactions in the modern shell model. The purpose here is, as mentioned above, to reexamine and understand the role of the mean-field potential in the shell evolution phenomenon, especially toward the dripline region. In contrast, the specific results of the SPE scheme are improved or modified, such as the$ N = 14 $ and$ N = 16 $ shell gaps in the WS potential (rather than those in the schematic HO potential of Ref. [12]). Moreover, the additional figure of isotones around$ N = 32 $ and$ N = 34 $ is valuable for explore these new magic numbers. Furthermore, the$ \kappa_{\rm so} = 0 $ case is added here to be a benchmark. These components could also lead to different knowledge of shell evolution from the viewpoint of the IPM to some extent.
Shell evolution in neutron-rich nuclei: the single particle perspective
- Received Date: 2021-09-13
- Available Online: 2022-01-15
Abstract: The isospin dependence of spin-orbit (SO) splitting becomes increasingly important as N/Z increases in neutron-rich nuclei. Following the initial independent-particle strategy toward explaining the occurrence of magic numbers, we systematically investigated the isospin effect on the shell evolution in neutron-rich nuclei within the Woods-Saxon mean-field potential and the SO term. It is found that new magic numbers N = 14 and N =16 may emerge in neutron-rich nuclei if one changes the sign of the isospin-dependent term in the SO coupling, whereas the traditional magic number, N = 20, may disappear. The magic number N = 28 is expected to be destroyed despite the sign choice of the isospin part in the SO splitting, corresponding to the strength of the SO coupling term. Meanwhile, the N = 50 and 82 shells may persist within the single particle scheme, although there is a decreasing trend of their gaps toward extreme proton-deficient nuclei. Besides, an appreciable energy gap appears at N = 32 and 34 in neutron-rich Ca isotopes. All these results are more consistent with those of the interacting shell model when enhancing the strength of the SO potential in the independent particle model. The present study may provide a more reasonable starting point than the existing one for not only the interacting shell model but also other nuclear many-body calculations toward the neutron-dripline of the Segrè chart.