2016
DOI: 10.1103/physreva.94.042503
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ionization potentials of superheavy elements No, Lr, and Rf and their ions

Abstract: We predict ionization potentials of superheavy elements No, Lr, and Rf and their ions using a relativistic hybrid method that combines configuration interaction (CI) with the linearized coupled-cluster approach. Extensive study of the completeness of the four-electron CI calculations for Hf and Rf was carried out. As a test of theoretical accuracy, we also calculated ionization potential of Yb, Lu, Hf, and their ions, which are homologues of the superheavy elements of this study.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
11
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
(35 reference statements)
2
11
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This exception is chiefly due to our uncertainty in Dn* (60.005) which is more than double that proposed by Sugar and Reader. 3 A recent paper 30 has drawn attention to the discrepancy of 3000 cm 21 between the NIST value for the fourth ionization energy of praseodymium (38.98 eV) and the quantum mechanical value of Eliav et al (38.61 eV). 31 It suggests that Sugar and Reader's semi-empirical value might be at fault because of an aberrant value of Dn* brought on by configuration interaction between 4f7s and 5d6p levels.…”
Section: Fourth Ionization Energiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This exception is chiefly due to our uncertainty in Dn* (60.005) which is more than double that proposed by Sugar and Reader. 3 A recent paper 30 has drawn attention to the discrepancy of 3000 cm 21 between the NIST value for the fourth ionization energy of praseodymium (38.98 eV) and the quantum mechanical value of Eliav et al (38.61 eV). 31 It suggests that Sugar and Reader's semi-empirical value might be at fault because of an aberrant value of Dn* brought on by configuration interaction between 4f7s and 5d6p levels.…”
Section: Fourth Ionization Energiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Calculated energy levels of Rf and its first three ions are presented in Table III and compared with other calculations. Energy levels of neutral Rf were calculated in a number of earlier works [11][12][13]24], energy levels of Rf+ were calculated in Refs. [11,13], only the ionization potential (IP) of Rf III and Rf IV were reported before [13,24,34].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[Rn]5f 14 7s 2 7p -> [Rn]5f 14 7s 2 + e-and [Rn]5f 14 7s 2 -> [Rn]5f 14 7s + 2e-, respectively [18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26].…”
Section: Discussionunclassified
“…Theoretical predictions, taking into account relativistic effects, were able to successfully reproduce Lr's observed low IP 1. These suggested that the ground state electronic configuration for Lr is [Rn]5f 14 7s 2 7p [18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26]. These measurements of the IP 1 values for the late-actinide elements indicated that the 5f orbital is first fully-occupied at No, whose electron configuration is predicted to be [Rn]5f 14 7s 2 [16].…”
Section: Implications For the Second-ionization Potential Of Lawrenciummentioning
confidence: 98%
See 1 more Smart Citation