Evaluation of half-life of 198Au

Chen, J.; Geraedts, Scott D.; Ouellet, C.; Singh, Balraj

doi:10.1016/j.apradiso.2011.03.024

Cited by 13 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As with other published half-life measurements, it is arguable that the formal uncertainties are underestimates, and following the practice of the Particle Data Group [24] should be inflated by a factor of χ 2 /d f . Perhaps because this experiment was carried out under more extreme conditions, the absolute values of the half-life are about 0.5% lower than our previous work and the consensus of a recent evaluation [25].…”

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 59%

Absence of a self-induced decay effect in 198Au

Lindstrom¹,

Fischbach²,

Buncher³

et al. 2011

Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A:

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report the results of an improved experiment aimed at determining whether the half-life ($T_{1/2}$) of $^{198}$Au depends on the shape of the source. In this experiment, the half-lives of a gold sphere and a thin gold wire were measured after each had been irradiated in the NIST Center for Neutron Research. In comparison to an earlier version of this experiment, both the specific activities of the samples and their relative surface/volume ratios have been increased, leading to an improved test for the hypothesized self-induced decay (SID) effect. We find T_1/2(sphere)/T_1/2(wire) = 0.9993+/-0.0002, which is compatible with no SID effect.Comment: 3 pages, no figure

show abstract

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 59%

Absence of a self-induced decay effect in 198Au

Lindstrom¹,

Fischbach²,

Buncher³

et al. 2011

Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A:

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These circumstances may make input data rather discrepant than consistent, and using simple statistical methods from textbooks on the subject like most often used classical weighted mean may be not justified. For these reason, several alternative statistical methods were developed, see, e.g., MacMahon et al (2004); Chen et al (2011); Malkin (2011c) and papers cited therein. For evaluation of R 0 , several of these methods were selected that are most representative and relevant, in our opinion, to this study.…”

Section: Statistical Methods Usedmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is well known metrological problem actual for many fields of science and engineering (Cox & Harris 2004). In particular, in this study we consider several methods developed for evaluation of the best estimates of some physical constants (MacMahon et al 2004;Chen et al 2011).…”

Section: Papermentioning

confidence: 99%

The current best estimate of the Galactocentric distance of the Sun based on comparison of different statistical techniques

Malkin¹

2012

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, the current best estimate of a fundamental Galactic parameter Galactocentric distance of the Sun R 0 has been evaluated using all the available estimates published during the last 20 years. Unlike some other studies, our analysis of these results showed no statistically significant trend in R 0 during this period. However we revealed a statistically valuable improvement in the R 0 uncertainties with time of about 0.2 kpc for 20 years. Several statistical techniques have been used and compared to obtain the most reliable common mean of 52 determinations made in 1992-2011 and its realistic uncertainty. The statistical methods used include unweighted mean, seven variants of the weighted mean, and two variants of median technique. The R 0 estimates obtained with these methods range from 7.91 to 8.06 kpc with uncertainties varying from 0.05 to 0.08 kpc. The final value derived in this analysis is R 0 = 7.98±0.15 | stat ±0.20 | syst kpc, which can be recommended as the current best estimate of the Galactocentric distance of the Sun. For most of the practical applications the value of R 0 = 8.0 ± 0.25 kpc can be used.

show abstract

“…To determine the average difference, we have used AveTools [56], which combines five different statistical methods to calculate averages of experimental data with uncertainties: (a) Limitation of Relative Statistical Weight (LWM) [58], (b) Normalised Residual Method (NRM) [58], (c) Rajeval Technique (RT) [58], (d) Bootstrap method (BS) [59], (e) Mandel-Paule approach (MP) [60]. A robust answer would be reached if all these methods gave the same answer, or the averages with their uncertainties are overlapping.…”

Section: Comparison With Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Method ∆Ω ratio (%) Reduced χ 2 Limitation of Relative Statistical Weight [58] -4.6(15) 1.56 Normalised Residual Method [58] -4.9(7) 1.40 Rajeval Technique [58] -4.9(6) 1.30 Bootstrap method [59] -4.7(12) 1.51 Mandel-Paule Approach [60] -5(4) 1.51…”

Section: Table Ementioning

confidence: 99%

Table of electronic factors for E0 electron and electron–positron pair conversion transitions

Dowie

Kibédi

Stuchbery

2020

Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A new tabulation of electronic factors is reported for electron conversion for elements of Z from 5 to 126 and electronic factors for electron-positron pair conversion for elements of even Z from 4 to 100.The electronic factors for electron conversion, Ω CE (E0), were calculated using a modified version of the CATAR program developed by Pauli and Raff with a relativistic-Hartree-Fock-Slater approach (Comp. Phys. Comm. 9 (1975) 392). The electronic factors for electron-positron pair conversion, Ω IP F (E0), were calculated using the model developed by Wilkinson (Nucl. Phys. A133 (1969) 1). The data tables presented here cover all atomic shells up to R2 and transition energies from 1 keV to 6000 keV and from 1100 keV to 8000 keV for pair conversion. A comparison with previous electronic factor tabulations is presented. Ratios of experimental Ω(E0) values for 83 E0 transitions in 8 ≤ Z ≤ 98 are compared to this tabulation. Two examples of how to use the tabulation to extract E0 strengths are also included.

show abstract

Evaluation of half-life of 198Au

Cited by 13 publications

References 49 publications

Absence of a self-induced decay effect in 198Au

Absence of a self-induced decay effect in 198Au

The current best estimate of the Galactocentric distance of the Sun based on comparison of different statistical techniques

Table of electronic factors for E0 electron and electron–positron pair conversion transitions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About