2012
DOI: 10.1139/p2012-074
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Breit–Pauli atomic structure calculations for sulphur-like titanium

Abstract: Configuration interaction calculation has been performed for excitation energies, oscillator strengths, and transition probabilities of 114 fine-structure levels of sulphur-like titanium. The relativistic effects are included in Breit–Pauli approximation by adding mass-correction, Darwin, and spin–orbit interaction terms to the nonrelativistic Hamiltonian. We have adjusted the diagonal elements of Hamiltonian matrices (fine-tuning) before the calculation of oscillator strength and transition probabilities for … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
16
2

Year Published

2013
2013
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
1
16
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Differences in energy levels between our calculated results and the NIST listings (with revised term labels as listed here) are up to 0.1 Ryd for some of the higher levels. The energies reported by Bièmont [16] and Singh et al [15] are closer to the NIST values, because both have made adjustments whereas our calculations are ab initio. However, energies from the MCHF calculations by Froese-Fischer et al [17] are also closer to the NIST listings, although many levels are missing from the latter.…”
Section: Lowest 48 Levelssupporting
confidence: 74%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Differences in energy levels between our calculated results and the NIST listings (with revised term labels as listed here) are up to 0.1 Ryd for some of the higher levels. The energies reported by Bièmont [16] and Singh et al [15] are closer to the NIST values, because both have made adjustments whereas our calculations are ab initio. However, energies from the MCHF calculations by Froese-Fischer et al [17] are also closer to the NIST listings, although many levels are missing from the latter.…”
Section: Lowest 48 Levelssupporting
confidence: 74%
“…Many transitions are unfortunately missing from the CIV3 calculations of Singh et al [15] and some of these are comparatively strong, such as: 1-41, 2-41/45 and 3-41. Furthermore, discrepancies between the CIV3 f-values and other calculations listed in Table 6 are up to five orders of magnitude -see for example, transitions 1-16/31/33, 2-15/31/33/34, 3-17/31 and 4-36.…”
Section: Radiative Ratesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations