2002
DOI: 10.1016/s0010-4655(02)00140-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A parallel R-matrix program PRMAT for electron–atom and electron–ion scattering calculations

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
41
0

Year Published

2003
2003
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
1
41
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition to the primary sources listed above, the atomic data for the present calculations were taken from Shine & Linsky (1974), Mendoza (1983), Nussbaumer & Storey (1983), Nussbaumer & Storey (1984), Luo & Pradhan (1989), Cunto et al (1993), Nahar & Pradhan (1993), Butler et al (1993), Zhang & Pradhan (1994), Nahar & Pradhan (1994), Mendoza et al (1995), Zhang & Pradhan (1995a), Zhang & Pradhan (1995b), Zhang (1996), Fernley et al (1999, Sunderland et al (2002), Tachiev &Froese Fischer (2002), andBautista (2004).…”
Section: Appendix A: Details On the Radiative Transfer Calculations Amentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition to the primary sources listed above, the atomic data for the present calculations were taken from Shine & Linsky (1974), Mendoza (1983), Nussbaumer & Storey (1983), Nussbaumer & Storey (1984), Luo & Pradhan (1989), Cunto et al (1993), Nahar & Pradhan (1993), Butler et al (1993), Zhang & Pradhan (1994), Nahar & Pradhan (1994), Mendoza et al (1995), Zhang & Pradhan (1995a), Zhang & Pradhan (1995b), Zhang (1996), Fernley et al (1999, Sunderland et al (2002), Tachiev &Froese Fischer (2002), andBautista (2004).…”
Section: Appendix A: Details On the Radiative Transfer Calculations Amentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In Table 6 we compare the present LS effective collision strengths with those of Sunderland et al (2002). Agreement between the two sets of data is good (within ∼20%), with the exception of the effective collision strengths for the 4 F− 2 D transition, which differs by ∼40%.…”
Section: Scattering Calculationsmentioning
confidence: 77%
“…Our target representation yields reasonably accurate energies, but the 2 H and 2 D terms come out in reverse energy order. By contrast, the target representation of Sunderland et al (2002) does predict the 2 H and 2 D terms in the correct order; yet their computed energies are considerably overestimated for all states of the 3d 7 configuration, perhaps due to missing configuration interaction.…”
Section: Scattering Calculationsmentioning
confidence: 90%
See 2 more Smart Citations