Do Halo Nuclei Follow Rutherford Elastic Scattering at Energies Below the Barrier? The Case of<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mi>Li</mml:mi><mml:mprescripts/><mml:none/><mml:mn>11</mml:mn></mml:mmultiscripts></mml:math>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first measurement of the elastic scattering of the halo nucleus 11Li and its core 9Li on 208Pb at energies near the Coulomb barrier is presented. The 11Li+208Pb elastic scattering shows a strong reduction with respect to the Rutherford cross section, even at energies well below the barrier and down to very small scattering angles. This drastic change of the elastic differential cross section observed in 11Li+208Pb is the consequence of the halo structure of 11Li, as it is not observed in the elastic scattering of its core 9Li at the same energies. Four-body continuum-discretized coupled-channels calculations, based on a three-body model of the 11Li projectile, are found to explain the measured angular distributions and confirm that the observed reduction is mainly due to the strong Coulomb coupling to the dipole states in the low-lying continuum of 11Li. These calculations suggest the presence of a low-lying dipole resonance in 11Li close to the breakup threshold.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".