Proton-nucleus elastic scattering: Comparison between phenomenological and microscopic optical potentials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Elastic scattering is a very important process to understand nuclear interactions in finite nuclei. Despite decades of efforts, the goal of reaching a coherent description of this physical process in terms of microscopic forces is still far from being completed.Purpose: In previous papers we derived a nonrelativistic theoretical optical potential from nucleon-nucleon chiral potentials at fourth (${\mathrm{N}}^{3}\mathrm{LO}$) and fifth order (${\mathrm{N}}^{4}\mathrm{LO}$). We checked convergence patterns and established theoretical error bands. With this work we study the performances of our optical potential in comparison with those of a successful nonrelativistic phenomenological optical potential in the description of elastic proton scattering data on several isotopic chains at energies around and above 200 MeV.Methods: We use the same framework and the same approximations as adopted in our previous papers, where the nonrelativistic optical potential is derived at the first-order term within the spectator expansion of the multiple scattering theory and adopting the impulse approximation and the optimum factorization approximation.Results: The cross sections and analyzing powers for elastic proton scattering off calcium, nickel, tin, and lead isotopes are presented for several incident proton energies, exploring the range $156\ensuremath{\le}E\ensuremath{\le}333$ MeV, where experimental data are available. In addition, we provide theoretical predictions for $^{56}\mathrm{Ni}$ at 400 MeV, which is of interest for the future experiments at EXL.Conclusions: Our results indicate that microscopic optical potentials derived from nucleon-nucleon chiral potentials at ${\mathrm{N}}^{4}\mathrm{LO}$ can provide reliable predictions for the cross section and the analyzing power both of stable and exotic nuclei, even at energies where the reliability of the chiral expansion starts to be questionable.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".