Probing the limits of statistical neutron capture for the r process: Experimental constraints on 141Cs nuclear level densities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The r -process abundance peaks, particularly near mass number A ∼ 130, reflect underlying nuclear structure effects such as closed neutron shells, yet modeling the nucleosynthesis in this region remains hindered by uncertain neutron-capture rates. These rates are especially sensitive to nuclear level densities (NLDs) and γ -ray strength functions of neutron-rich nuclei, where experimental data are scarce. We present the first experimental constraint on the NLD of 141Cs using the β-Oslo method, extending sensitivity to the neutron-rich regime near the N=82 closed shell. Our data allow for critical calibration of microscopic NLD models and reveal that 141Cs lies near the limit of statistical model applicability. Using this experimental input, we evaluate radiative neutron-capture rates across neighboring isotones using both Hauser–Feshbach (HF) and High Fidelity Resonance (HFR) models. Our results show order-of-magnitude rate increases for nuclei along the N=86 line, signaling a transition to resonance-dominated capture in this region. These findings underscore the importance of constraining NLDs to improve r -process reaction network predictions, particularly in environments where the validity of statistical models breaks down.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".