Our system is currently under heavy load due to increased usage. We're actively working on upgrades to improve performance. Thank you for your patience.
2014
DOI: 10.1103/physrevc.89.014310
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

High-spin level structure of35S

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
20
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
3
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The [2,1] configurations in 34 S are similar to the [1,1] ones in 32 S; they are SD at low spin but lose the collectivity with increasing spin so that they are better described as highly-deformed at the highest calculated spins (Fig. 31).…”
Section: S Nucleusmentioning
confidence: 73%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The [2,1] configurations in 34 S are similar to the [1,1] ones in 32 S; they are SD at low spin but lose the collectivity with increasing spin so that they are better described as highly-deformed at the highest calculated spins (Fig. 31).…”
Section: S Nucleusmentioning
confidence: 73%
“…Third, in experiment the high spin structures in this mass region are better populated in the N ∼ Z nuclei. Note also that at present high spin studies are quite active in this mass region [30,[32][33][34][35].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 89%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The overlap of the SRIM calculated stopping powers with the measured values, for heavy-ions, is presently quoted around 5% with 69% of the data within 5% of the TRIM calculated value and 86% within 10% [7]. This is significantly better than the stopping powers calculated using the models of Ziegler [10] and Northcliffe-Schilling [11], used in the conventional LINESHAPE program, that can have uncertainty as high as 15-20% [20,21].…”
Section: Programming and Methodologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The current methodology was first used for analysis of data acquired with thick elemental target that is presumably a simpler medium for stopping simula- An uncertainty of 5% on the stopping power has been included for the TRIM results while that in the results obtained using the Ziegler and the Northcliffe-Schilling models has been assigned to be 15% [20,21]. = 34 MeV, with a thick (∼ 200 mg/cm 2 ) elemental 27 Al foil as the target and 16 O beam provided by the 15UD Pelletron at the Inter University Accelerator Center (IUAC), New Delhi.…”
Section: Thick Elemental Targetmentioning
confidence: 99%