1: % Template article for preprint document class `elsart'
2: % SP 2006/04/26
3:
4: %\documentclass{elsart}
5:
6: % Use the option doublespacing or reviewcopy to obtain double line spacing
7: \documentclass[doublespacing]{elsart}
8:
9: % if you use PostScript figures in your article
10: % use the graphics package for simple commands
11: % \usepackage{graphics}
12: % or use the graphicx package for more complicated commands
13: \usepackage{graphicx}
14: % or use the epsfig package if you prefer to use the old commands
15: % \usepackage{epsfig}
16:
17: % The amssymb package provides various useful mathematical symbols
18: \usepackage{amssymb}
19:
20: % The lineno packages adds line numbers. Start line numbering with
21: % \begin{linenumbers}, end it with \end{linenumbers}. Or switch it on
22: % for the whole article with \linenumbers.
23: % \usepackage{lineno}
24:
25: % \linenumbers
26:
27: \newcommand{\ie}{i.e.}
28:
29: \begin{document}
30:
31: \begin{frontmatter}
32:
33: % Title, authors and addresses
34:
35: % use the thanksref command within \title, \author or \address for footnotes;
36: % use the corauthref command within \author for corresponding author footnotes;
37: % use the ead command for the email address,
38: % and the form \ead[url] for the home page:
39: % \title{Title\thanksref{label1}}
40: % \thanks[label1]{}
41: % \author{Name\corauthref{cor1}\thanksref{label2}}
42: % \ead{email address}
43: % \ead[url]{home page}
44: % \thanks[label2]{}
45: % \corauth[cor1]{}
46: % \address{Address\thanksref{label3}}
47: % \thanks[label3]{}
48:
49: %\title{Unbound excited states in ${\bm ^{19,17}{\rm C}}$}
50: \title{Unbound excited states in \nuc{19,17}{C}}
51:
52: % use optional labels to link authors explicitly to addresses:
53: % \author[label1,label2]{}
54: % \address[label1]{}
55: % \address[label2]{}
56:
57: \author[titech]{Y.~Satou},
58: \ead{satou@phys.titech.ac.jp}
59: \author[titech]{T.~Nakamura},
60: \author[riken]{N.~Fukuda},
61: \author[riken]{T.~Sugimoto},
62: \author[riken]{Y.~Kondo},
63: \author[titech]{N.~Matsui},
64: \author[titech]{Y.~Hashimoto},
65: \author[titech]{T.~Nakabayashi},
66: \author[titech]{T.~Okumura},
67: \author[titech]{M.~Shinohara},
68: \author[riken]{T.~Motobayashi},
69: \author[riken]{Y.~Yanagisawa},
70: \author[riken]{N.~Aoi},
71: \author[riken]{S.~Takeuchi},
72: \author[riken]{T.~Gomi},
73: \author[rikkyo]{Y.~Togano},
74: \author[rikkyo]{S.~Kawai},
75: \author[riken]{H.~Sakurai},
76: \author[tokyo]{H.~J.~Ong},
77: \author[tokyo]{T.~K.~Onishi},
78: \author[cns]{S.~Shimoura},
79: \author[cns]{M.~Tamaki},
80: \author[tohoku]{T.~Kobayashi},
81: \author[riken]{H.~Otsu},
82: \author[tohoku]{Y.~Matsuda},
83: \author[tohoku]{N.~Endo},
84: \author[tohoku]{M.~Kitayama}, \\
85: and \author[riken]{M.~Ishihara}
86:
87: \address[titech]{Department of Physics, Tokyo Institute of Technology,
88: 2-12-1 Oh-Okayama, Meguro, Tokyo 152-8551, Japan}
89: \address[riken]{The Institute of Physical and Chemical Research (RIKEN),
90: 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan}
91: \address[rikkyo]{Department of Physics, Rikkyo University,
92: 3 Nishi-Ikebukuro, Toshima, Tokyo 171-8501, Japan}
93: \address[tokyo]{Department of Physics, University of Tokyo,
94: 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan}
95: \address[cns]{Center for Nuclear Study (CNS), University of Tokyo,
96: 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan}
97: \address[tohoku]{Department of Physics, Tohoku University,
98: Aoba, Sendai, Miyagi 980-8578, Japan}
99:
100: \begin{abstract}
101: % Text of abstract
102: The neutron-rich carbon isotopes $^{19,17}{\rm C}$
103: have been investigated via proton inelastic scattering
104: on a liquid hydrogen target at 70 MeV/nucleon.
105: The invariant mass method in inverse kinematics was employed
106: to reconstruct
107: %extract
108: the energy spectrum,
109: in which fast neutrons and charged fragments
110: were detected in coincidence using a neutron hodoscope
111: and a dipole magnet system.
112: A peak has been observed
113: with an excitation energy of 1.46(10) MeV in $^{19}{\rm C}$,
114: while three peaks with energies of 2.20(3), 3.05(3), and 6.13(9) MeV
115: have been observed in $^{17}{\rm C}$.
116: %The
117: Deduced cross sections
118: %leading to the 1.46 and 2.20 MeV states
119: are compared with microscopic DWBA calculations
120: based on $p$-$sd$ shell model wave functions
121: and modern nucleon-nucleus optical potentials.
122: $J^{\pi}$ assignments are made
123: for the four observed states as well as the ground states of both nuclei.
124: \end{abstract}
125:
126: \begin{keyword}
127: % keywords here, in the form: keyword \sep keyword
128: % PACS codes here, in the form: \PACS code \sep code
129: \PACS 24.10.-i \sep 25.40.Ep \sep 27.20.+n \sep 21.60.Cs
130: \end{keyword}
131: \end{frontmatter}
132:
133: % main text
134: %\section{}
135: %\label{}
136:
137: With the advent of new radioactive beam facilities
138: capable of producing intense beams of various nuclear species
139: far from the stability line, even at the drip-line,
140: an increasingly large amount of
141: %more and more
142: information on nuclear levels and modes of excitation
143: is being accumulated throughout the nuclear chart.
144: New phenomena, such as nuclear halos and skins~\cite{Tanihata85},
145: enhanced $E1$ transition strengths~\cite{Nakamura94-06,Adrich05},
146: and
147: modifications of shell closures~\cite{Iwasaki00,Ozawa00}
148: have been revealed.
149: Of particular interest in recent years are the neutron-rich carbon isotopes,
150: which have attracted attention not only from their own structural interest,
151: such as the anomalously reduced $E2$ transition strength in
152: $^{16}{\rm C}$~\cite{Imai04,Elekes04},
153: but also
154: for their implications for
155: %from an implication to
156: a new magic number at the neutron number $N$=16
157: proposed in oxygen isotopes~\cite{Ozawa00,Elekes07}.
158:
159: Neutron number dependence of ground state deformations of carbon isotopes
160: has been investigated in a deformed Hartree-Fock (HF) theory~\cite{Suzuki03a}.
161: Generally the prolate deformation is expected at the beginning of the shell
162: whereas oblate deformation arises towards the end of the shell.
163: Note that the occurrence of nuclear deformations in the ground state
164: is a consequence of the spontaneous symmetry breaking effect
165: known in many fields of physics,
166: and there is broad
167: %a wide
168: interest
169: in elucidating the intriguing deformation-driving
170: mechanism in atomic nuclei~\cite{Sagawa04},
171: which would be a nuclear physics analogue
172: of the Jahn-Teller effect in molecular physics~\cite{Jahn37}.
173: The theory predicts prolate deformations for carbon isotopes with $N$=9--11.
174: For $^{19}{\rm C}$ with $N$=13
175: two almost degenerate deformed minima
176: %minima almost degenerated in energy
177: are predicted
178: %at both sides
179: with
180: %different
181: spins
182: $J^{\pi}$=$1/2^+$ (prolate)
183: %for prolate
184: and $3/2^+$ (oblate).
185: %for oblate deformations.
186: Since the shape change at a neutron number
187: smaller than the middle of $N$=8 and 20
188: indicates a new shell closure at $N$=16,
189: it is argued that definite information on the structure of $^{19}{\rm C}$
190: is important to clarify the possible new shell effect
191: in the neutron-rich carbon isotopes~\cite{Suzuki03a,Suzuki03b}.
192:
193: The $^{19}{\rm C}$ nucleus is the heaviest odd carbon isotope.
194: It is loosely bound with a neutron separation energy
195: of $S_n$=0.58(9) MeV~\cite{Audi03},
196: and exhibits one-neutron halo structure as evidenced
197: by large Coulomb break-up cross sections~\cite{Nakamura99}.
198: The ground state spin and parity were
199: %property was
200: also investigated via the measurements
201: of longitudinal momentum distributions of charged fragments
202: after the removal of one neutron
203: from $^{19}{\rm C}$~\cite{Bazin95,Maddalena01}.
204: From these measurements
205: the spin-parity was assigned to be $J^{\pi}_{\rm g.s.}$=$1/2^+$.
206: Other possibilities, however,
207: have been suggested by authors in Ref.~\cite{Kanungo05}
208: based on their experiment
209: in search of an isomeric transition.
210: Moreover, there remains a controversy over the different widths
211: of longitudinal momentum distributions measured
212: at different energies~\cite{Bazin98,Baumann98},
213: which has led to a conjecture of a possible resonance state
214: just above the particle decay threshold
215: as a clue to solve such an inconsistency~\cite{Smedberg99}.
216:
217: In this situation
218: it it worthwhile accumulating experimental information
219: on the ground as well as excited states of $^{19}{\rm C}$.
220: This paper reports a new measurement
221: using the $(p,p')$ inelastic scattering on $^{19}{\rm C}$
222: employing the invariant mass method in inverse kinematics.
223: Both decaying neutrons and charged fragments were detected,
224: and an isolated level was
225: identified
226: %selected
227: in the final state.
228: The measurement was also made,
229: partly for calibration purposes,
230: on another loosely bound nucleus $^{17}{\rm C}$,
231: having $S_n$=0.73(2) MeV~\cite{Audi03},
232: for which $J^{\pi}_{\rm g.s.}$ is consistently reported
233: to be $3/2^+$~\cite{Maddalena01,Ogawa02,Sauvan00-04,Pramanik03}.
234:
235: The $(p,p')$ reaction has the following advantages:
236: (1) The magnitude of the cross section,
237: %The cross section magnitude,
238: being sensitive to both the initial and final state wave functions,
239: is configuration dependent.
240: (2) The shape of the angular distribution
241: %The angular distribution shape
242: also depends on the configuration
243: through characteristic transferred $L$ dependences of partial amplitudes.
244: (3) Theoretical methods such as the distorted-wave Born approximation (DWBA)
245: can be used to provide a first interpretation of data.
246: %applies in interpreting data.
247: There exists one $(p,p')$ work on $^{19}{\rm C}$
248: reporting two bound states at 0.20 and 0.27 MeV
249: using $\gamma$-ray spectroscopy~\cite{Elekes05}.
250: These states are tentatively assigned as $3/2^+$ and $5/2^+$, respectively,
251: based on the assumption of $J^{\pi}_{\rm g.s.}$=$1/2^+$.
252: Close proximity of levels near the ground state
253: has made it difficult to identify levels from comparisons in excitation energy
254: between theory and experiment.
255: Note that
256: in shell model calculations~\cite{Maddalena01}
257: the triplet of levels
258: %with $J^{\pi}$=$1/2^+$, $3/2^+$, and $5/2^+$
259: are predicted below 0.62 MeV
260: with no
261: %unique
262: ground state configuration favoured.
263: We have chosen to probe states in the unbound region,
264: where in contrast to the bound region a lower level density is predicted up to
265: about 3 MeV from the threshold in a shell model calculation described later.
266: With no states known above the particle decay threshold,
267: the measurement involved a search for resonances in this region,
268: and we report a new state in this paper.
269: For $^{17}{\rm C}$ eleven new states up to 16.3 MeV excitation energy
270: have been recently
271: reported from
272: %identified via
273: the three-neutron transfer reaction
274: $^{14}{\rm C}$($^{12}{\rm C}$,$^9{\rm C}$)$^{17}{\rm C}$,
275: with limited spin assignments~\cite{Bohlen07}.
276: This nucleus is also known to have a low-lying triplet
277: of levels $1/2^+$, $3/2^+$, and $5/2^+$ below 0.33 MeV~\cite{Elekes05}.
278:
279: The experiment was performed
280: at the RIKEN Accelerator Research Facility (RARF).
281: The radioactive beams of $^{19}{\rm C}$ and $^{17}{\rm C}$
282: at 70 MeV/nucleon
283: were produced using the projectile-fragment separator, RIPS~\cite{Kubo92},
284: from a $^{22}{\rm Ne}$ primary beam at 110 MeV/nucleon.
285: Typical beam intensities were 260 cps for $^{19}{\rm C}$
286: and 10.4 kcps for $^{17}{\rm C}$
287: with momentum spreads $\Delta P/P$ of 3.0\% and 0.1\%, respectively.
288: The secondary target was a cryogenic hydrogen target~\cite{Ryuto06}
289: having a cylindrical shape,
290: 3 cm in diameter and 120$\pm$2 mg/cm$^2$ in thickness.
291: %The thickness
292: %%of the target
293: %was chosen not to deteriorate the invariant mass
294: %resolution but to obtain reasonable counting statistics.
295: %Ejected
296: The target was surrounded by forty-eight NaI(Tl) scintillators
297: used to detect de-excitation $\gamma$-rays from the charged fragments.
298: Each crystal had a dimension of 6.1$\times$6.1$\times$12.2 cm$^3$.
299: The charged fragments
300: %particles
301: were bent by a dipole magnet behind the target
302: and were detected by a plastic counter hodoscope.
303: Multi-wire drift chambers placed before and after the magnet
304: were used to extract trajectory information of the charged particles.
305: %determine the trajectory of the charged particles.
306: Neutrons were detected by a neutron hodoscope
307: %consisted
308: consisting of two walls of a plastic scintillator array
309: placed 4.6 and 5.8 m behind the target.
310: Each wall had a dimension of 2.14$^{\rm W}$$\times$0.72$^{\rm H}$
311: (or 0.90$^{\rm H}$)$\times$0.12$^{\rm T}$ m$^3$.
312: %two
313: %plastic scintillator hodoscopes
314: %%neutron counter hodoscopes
315: %placed 4.6 m and 5.8 m behind the target;
316: %each had a dimension of
317: %2.14$^{\rm W}$$\times$0.72$^{\rm W}$(or 0.90$^{\rm H}$)$\times$0.12$^{\rm T}$
318: %m$^3$.
319: %Total detection efficiency of the hodoscope
320: The total efficiency of the hodoscope
321: was
322: 24.1$\pm$0.8\%
323: %24.1$\pm$0.3\%
324: for a threshold setting of 4 MeVee.
325: This was
326: deduced by measuring the $^7{\rm Li}(p,n)^7{\rm Be}$(g.s.+0.43 MeV) reaction
327: at $E_p$=70 MeV and using existing cross section data~\cite{Taddeucci90}.
328: %measured to be 24.1$\pm$0.3\% at a threshold setting of 4 MeVee
329: %by using the $^7{\rm Li}(p,n)^7{\rm Be}$(g.s.+0.43 MeV) reaction
330: %at $E_p$=70 MeV
331: %and the known cross sections~\cite{Taddeucci90}.
332: The invariant mass of the final system was calculated event-by-event
333: from the momentum vectors of the charged particle and the neutron.
334: A series of studies
335: probing unbound resonance states in beryllium isotopes
336: has been successfully performed
337: using a detector setup similar to the present
338: one~\cite{Fukuda04,Sugimoto06,Kondo07}.
339:
340: Figure~\ref{fig:spectrum_fit_gamma_plb} shows relative energy spectra
341: for the (a) $^1{\rm H}$($^{19}{\rm C},$$^{18}{\rm C}$+$n)$,
342: (b) $^1{\rm H}$($^{17}{\rm C},$$^{16}{\rm C}$+$n)$,
343: and (c) $^1{\rm H}$($^{19}{\rm C},$$^{16}{\rm C}(2^+;1.77$ MeV)+$n)$
344: reactions,
345: integrated over center-of-mass angles up to $\theta_{\rm c.m.}$=$64^{\circ}$.
346: The effect of the finite detector acceptance was corrected for
347: in panels (a) and (b), \ie{} in inelastic channels.
348: Shown in the insets of panels (a) and (b) are spectra
349: %in the same inelastic channels,
350: obtained in coincidence with de-excitation $\gamma$-rays
351: from the first $2^+$ states at 1.58(1) MeV in $^{18}{\rm C}$~\cite{Stanoiu04}
352: and at 1.77(1) MeV in $^{16}{\rm C}$~\cite{Tilley93}, respectively.
353: The spectrum in panel (c) also required the coincidence detection
354: of $\gamma$-rays from the $2^+$ state in $^{16}{\rm C}$.
355: Background contributions from various window materials surrounding the target,
356: measured with an empty target,
357: are subtracted.
358: Error bars represent statistical uncertainties.
359: Peak structures at about 0.9 MeV in relative energy in $^{19}{\rm C}$
360: and about 1.5 MeV in $^{17}{\rm C}$
361: are clearly seen in spectra without requiring $\gamma$-ray coincidences.
362: They are absent in the respective $\gamma$-ray coincidence spectra.
363: We thus conclude that charged particles resulting from the decay of
364: these peaks are in their ground states.
365: In panel (b)
366: we can see two more peaks
367: at about 0.6 and 3.6 MeV in relative energy.
368: These are visible in the $\gamma$-ray coincidence spectrum
369: in the inset of panel (b);
370: the 0.6 MeV peak is more clearly populated in the spectrum in panel (c).
371: This observation indicates that these peaks in $^{17}{\rm C}$
372: decay through the first $2^+$ state in $^{16}{\rm C}$.
373:
374: \begin{figure}[P]
375: \begin{center}
376: \includegraphics*[width=18cm,angle=-90]{spectrum_fit_gamma_plb.eps}
377: \end{center}
378: \caption{Relative energy spectra
379: integrated over an angular range below $\theta_{\rm c.m.}$=64$^{\circ}$
380: for the (a) $^1{\rm H}(^{19}{\rm C},$$^{18}{\rm C}$+$n)$,
381: (b) $^1{\rm H}(^{17}{\rm C},$$^{16}{\rm C}$+$n)$, and
382: (c) $^1{\rm H}(^{19}{\rm C},$$^{16}{\rm C}(2^+;1.77$ MeV)+$n)$ reactions
383: at 70 MeV/nucleon.
384: Shown in the insets of panels (a) and (b) are spectra
385: obtained in coincidence with de-excitation $\gamma$-rays from the first
386: $2^+$ states of the respective charged fragments.
387: The instrumental background was subtracted in the spectra.
388: Solid lines represent the results of the fit,
389: dashed lines background introduced to reproduce the overall spectrum. }
390: \label{fig:spectrum_fit_gamma_plb}
391: \end{figure}
392:
393: The experimental spectra were analyzed
394: to extract the resonance energy $E_r$ and the width $\Gamma_r$
395: in the following way.
396: Firstly,
397: a single Breit-Wigner shape function was generated
398: for certain values of $E_r$ and $\Gamma_r$:
399: \begin{equation}
400: \sigma(E_{\rm rel})\sim\frac{\Gamma_l(E_{\rm rel})\Gamma_r}
401: {\{E_r+\Delta E_l(E_{\rm rel})-E_{\rm rel}\}^2
402: +\{\Gamma_l(E_{\rm rel})/2\}^2}.
403: \end{equation}
404: The shift function $\Delta E_l(E_{\rm rel})$
405: and the level width $\Gamma_l(E_{\rm rel})$,
406: which depend on the relative energy $E_{\rm rel}$,
407: were calculated by using the penetration $P_l$ and
408: shift $S_l$ factors~\cite{Lane-Thomas58}
409: by the relations:
410: \begin{eqnarray}
411: \Delta E_l(E_{\rm rel})&=&
412: \Gamma_r\times \{S_l(E_r)-S_l(E_{\rm rel})\}/\{2P_l(E_r)\}, \\
413: \Gamma_l(E_{\rm rel})&=&
414: \Gamma_r\times P_l(E_{\rm rel})/P_l(E_r),
415: \end{eqnarray}
416: where $l$ refers to the decay angular momentum.
417: Decay neutrons were supposed to be in the $l$=2 orbit.
418: %$d$-orbit.
419: The channel radius was taken to be
420: $R$=$r_0(A_n^{1/3}+A_f^{1/3})$ with $r_0$=1.4 fm,
421: where $A_n$ and $A_f$
422: are the neutron and charged fragment mass numbers,
423: respectively.
424: Then,
425: the experimental resolution,
426: including the detector resolution, beam profile,
427: Coulomb multiple scattering of charged particles,
428: and their range difference in the secondary target,
429: was incorporated to generate a response function.
430: The relative energy resolution was well simulated
431: by $\Delta E_{\rm rel}$=0.13$\sqrt{E_{\rm rel}}$ MeV (rms).
432: The procedure was repeated for each resonance peak by varying
433: the initial values of $E_r$ and $\Gamma_r$.
434: Parameters which gave the best fit to the data were obtained
435: by minimizing the $\chi^2$.
436: %finding $\chi^2$ minimum.
437: The solid curves in Fig.~\ref{fig:spectrum_fit_gamma_plb}
438: show the results of the fit;
439: the dashed lines background introduced
440: to reproduce the overall spectrum.
441: %%final response functions on top of the background
442: %%indicated by
443: %%shown as
444: %%dashed lines.
445: %%the shape of which was appropriately chosen
446: %%to reproduce the overall spectrum.
447: %%The functional shape of the latter was appropriately chosen
448: %%to reproduce the overall spectrum.
449: %%show the results of the fit.
450: %%The dashed lines represent the background;
451: %%the functional shape was appropriately chosen
452: %%to reproduce the overall spectrum.
453:
454: Resonance parameters extracted
455: are summarized in Table~\ref{tbl:resonance_parameters}.
456: %Uncertainties in $E_r$ and $\Gamma_r$
457: %are taken to be the amount of variations from the best fit values,
458: %which leads to an increase in $\chi^2$ by 1.
459: The excitation energy $E_{\rm x}$
460: is obtained by the relation: $E_{\rm x}$=$E_r$+$S_n$+$E^{*}$,
461: where $E^{*}$ refers to the excitation energy of the daughter nucleus.
462: The state at $E_{\rm x}$=1.46(10) MeV in $^{19}{\rm C}$
463: was observed for the first time in this measurement.
464: The 2.20(3), 3.05(3), and 6.13(9) MeV states in $^{17}{\rm C}$
465: are respectively close to the 2.06, 3.10, and 6.20 MeV states
466: observed in the three-neutron transfer reaction~\cite{Bohlen07}.
467: Extracted widths for the 1.46 and 2.20 MeV states
468: are $\Gamma_r$=0.29(2) and 0.53(4) MeV, respectively.
469: These values are of the order of
470: %comparable to
471: the respective single-particle estimates for the width
472: of $l$=2 resonances~\cite{Bohr68},
473: $\Gamma_{\rm sp}$=0.25 and 0.78 MeV,
474: supporting the assumption of $l$=2 decays of these states.
475: %that $l$=2 neutrons are responsible for the decay.
476: For the 3.05 MeV state
477: the $\Gamma_r$ value was not extracted
478: since it was insensitive to the spectrum shape
479: owing to the
480: %due to
481: very small penetration factors at low relative energies.
482: Cross sections leading to these states,
483: angle-integrated up to $\theta_{\rm c.m.}$=64$^{\circ}$,
484: are given in Table~\ref{tbl:resonance_parameters}.
485: Differential cross sections leading to the 1.46 MeV state in $^{19}{\rm C}$
486: are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:neut_19c_ad_plb},
487: and those to the 2.20 and 3.05 MeV states in $^{17}{\rm C}$
488: are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:neut_17c_ad_plb}.
489: The errors shown
490: are the quadratic sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties;
491: the latter in the absolute magnitude of the cross section
492: is estimated to be 7\%,
493: including ambiguities in target thickness,
494: neutron detection efficiency,
495: and fitting procedure.
496: The angular resolution varied
497: from $\Delta\theta_{\rm c.m.}$=3.4$^{\circ}$ (3.1$^{\circ}$) in rms
498: at $\theta_{\rm c.m.}$=4$^{\circ}$
499: to 5.1$^{\circ}$ (4.6$^{\circ}$) at 60$^{\circ}$
500: for $^{19}{\rm C}$ ($^{17}{\rm C}$).
501: %This was estimated using a Monte Carlo simulation
502: %which took into account the detector resolution,
503: %the Coulomb multiple scattering of charged particles,
504: %and the range difference of them in the target.
505: %supporting the assumption
506: %on the orbital angular momentum of the decaying neutron ($d$-orbit)
507: %in the response function analysis.
508: %suggesting that the major contribution to the width
509: %comes from the decay of a d-wave neutron.
510:
511: To obtain an understanding of the results
512: shell model calculations were performed using the code OXBASH~\cite{OXBASH88}
513: within the 0$\hbar\omega$ configurations in the $p$-$sd$ shell model space.
514: For $^{19}{\rm C}$,
515: the second $5/2^+_2$ state is predicted at 1.40, 1.54, and 1.47 MeV
516: with the WBT, WBP~\cite{Warburton92}, and MK~\cite{Millener75}
517: interactions, respectively.
518: These energies are close to the experimental value of 1.46 MeV;
519: it is likely that this state corresponds to the $5/2^+_2$ state.
520: %leading to the $5/2^+_2$ assignment for this state.
521: %reasonably close
522: %%to each other and
523: %to the energy of 1.46 MeV of the observed peak.
524: %The 1.46 MeV state is thus likely to be the $5/2^+_2$ state.
525: %The good agreement in energy allows the $5/2^+_2$ assignment for this state.
526: %will lead to the assignment of $5/2^+_2$ for this state.
527: %the state at 1.46 MeV.
528: %These
529: %are very near to the observed excitation energy of $E_{\rm x}$=1.46 MeV;
530: %it is likely that this peak has a $J^{\pi}$ value of $\frac52^+$.
531: %The next state predicted is the first $7/2^+$ state,
532: %which is 700 keV above the $5/2^+_2$ state with the PSDWBT interaction.
533: The closest higher-lying state is the $7/2^+_1$ state
534: predicted 0.7--1.0 MeV above the $5/2^+_2$ state.
535: %The next state predicted is the $7/2^+_1$ state
536: %lying 0.7--1.0 MeV above the $5/2^+_2$ state.
537: For $^{17}{\rm C}$,
538: with the WBT interaction
539: four states $5/2^+_2$(1.72 MeV), $7/2^+_1$(2.33 MeV),
540: $9/2^+_1$(3.01 MeV), and $3/2^+_2$(3.08 MeV)
541: are predicted
542: above the decay threshold and below 3.5 MeV.
543: %in the relevant energy region.
544: %above the threshold and
545: %below 3.5 MeV.
546:
547: \begin{table}[p]
548: \begin{center}
549: \caption{Resonance parameters and populating cross sections
550: from this experiment.
551: The excitation energy and the cross section
552: are compared to theoretical values.
553: Cross sections are integrated up to $\theta_{\rm c.m.}$=64$^{\circ}$.
554: DWBA cross sections $\sigma_{\rm DWBA}$
555: leading to states specified by $J^{\pi}$
556: are obtained by using the shell model wave functions
557: with the WBT interaction,
558: assuming $J^{\pi}_{\rm g.s.}$=1/2$^+_1$ for $^{19}{\rm C}$
559: and 3/2$^+_1$ for $^{17}{\rm C}$.
560: \label{tbl:resonance_parameters}}
561: \begin{tabular}{crrrrrrrr} \hline \hline
562: &
563: \multicolumn{4}{c}{Experiment} & &
564: \multicolumn{3}{c}{Theory} \\
565: \cline{2-5}
566: \cline{7-9}
567: Nucleus &
568: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$E_r$} &
569: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$E_{\rm x}$} &
570: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\Gamma_r$} &
571: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\sigma_{\rm exp}$} & &
572: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$E_{\rm x}$} &
573: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\sigma_{\rm DWBA}$} &
574: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$J^{\pi}$} \\
575: &
576: \multicolumn{1}{c}{(MeV)} &
577: \multicolumn{1}{c}{(MeV)} &
578: \multicolumn{1}{c}{(MeV)} &
579: \multicolumn{1}{c}{(mb)} & &
580: \multicolumn{1}{c}{(MeV)} &
581: \multicolumn{1}{c}{(mb)} &
582: \\ \hline
583: $^{19}{\rm C}$ &
584: \multicolumn{1}{c}{0.88(1)} &
585: \multicolumn{1}{c}{\hspace*{1.1ex}1.46(10)} &
586: \multicolumn{1}{c}{0.29(2)} &
587: \multicolumn{1}{c}{8.6(4)} & &
588: \multicolumn{1}{c}{1.40} &
589: \multicolumn{1}{c}{6.9\hspace*{1.2ex}} &
590: \multicolumn{1}{c}{5/2$^+_2$} \\
591: $^{17}{\rm C}$ &
592: \multicolumn{1}{c}{1.47(2)} &
593: \multicolumn{1}{c}{2.20(3)} &
594: \multicolumn{1}{c}{0.53(4)} &
595: \multicolumn{1}{c}{3.8(2)} & &
596: \multicolumn{1}{c}{2.33} &
597: \multicolumn{1}{c}{2.7\hspace*{1.2ex}} &
598: \multicolumn{1}{c}{7/2$^+_1$} \\
599: &
600: \multicolumn{1}{c}{0.55(2)} &
601: \multicolumn{1}{c}{3.05(3)} &
602: \multicolumn{1}{c}{---} &
603: \multicolumn{1}{c}{\hspace*{1.1ex}0.40(4)} & &
604: \multicolumn{1}{c}{3.01} &
605: \multicolumn{1}{c}{0.48} &
606: \multicolumn{1}{c}{9/2$^+_1$} \\
607: &
608: \multicolumn{1}{c}{3.63(9)} &
609: \multicolumn{1}{c}{6.13(9)} &
610: \multicolumn{1}{c}{\hspace*{1.7ex}0.26$^{+0.4}_{-0.26}$} &
611: \multicolumn{1}{c}{0.8(1)} & &
612: \multicolumn{1}{c}{6.25} &
613: \multicolumn{1}{c}{0.94} &
614: \multicolumn{1}{c}{5/2$^+_4$} \\
615: \hline
616: \hline
617: \end{tabular}
618: \end{center}
619: \end{table}
620:
621: \begin{figure}[P]
622: \begin{center}
623: \includegraphics*[height=11cm,angle=-90]{neut_19c_ad_plb.eps}
624: \end{center}
625: \caption{Differential cross sections leading
626: to the 1.46 MeV state in $^{19}{\rm C}$
627: are compared to DWBA predictions obtained
628: by assuming different initial-state configurations.
629: $J^{\pi}$=$5/2^+_2$ is assumed for the excited state. }
630: \label{fig:neut_19c_ad_plb}
631: \end{figure}
632:
633: \begin{figure}[P]
634: \begin{center}
635: \includegraphics*[height=11cm,angle=-90]{neut_17c_ad_plb.eps}
636: \end{center}
637: \caption{Differential cross sections leading
638: to the 2.20 and 3.05 MeV states in $^{17}{\rm C}$
639: are compared to DWBA predictions obtained
640: by assuming different initial-state configurations.
641: $J^{\pi}$ values assumed for the excited states
642: are $7/2^+_1$ and $9/2^+_1$ for the 2.20 and 3.05 MeV states,
643: respectively. }
644: \label{fig:neut_17c_ad_plb}
645: \end{figure}
646:
647: In order to further clarify the nature of states
648: %identify
649: %transitions
650: %initial and final states
651: %configurations
652: involved in transitions shown in
653: Table~\ref{tbl:resonance_parameters},
654: %Fig.~\ref{fig:neut_19c_17c_ad_plb},
655: microscopic DWBA calculations
656: were performed using the code DW81~\cite{Raynal70}.
657: The optical potential was taken from the global parameterization
658: KD02~\cite{Koning03}.
659: A microscopic optical potential~\cite{Garcia05}
660: based on the approach of Jeukenne, Lejeune, and Mahaux (JLM)~\cite{JLM77}
661: %recently introduced by Tostevin~\cite{Tostevin99},
662: was also tested.
663: The projectile-nucleon effective interaction
664: was the M3Y interaction~\cite{Bertsch77}.
665: The transition density was calculated with the shell model
666: using the WBT interaction~\cite{Warburton92}.
667: The single-particle wave function
668: was generated in a harmonic oscillator well.
669: The oscillator parameter
670: was chosen so that the rms radius
671: corresponding to
672: %implied by
673: the wave function
674: reproduces the experimental value~\cite{Ozawa01}:
675: $b$=2.07 fm for $^{19}{\rm C}$ and 1.83 fm for $^{17}{\rm C}$.
676: The effect of core polarization on quadrupole transition amplitudes
677: was taken into account in the isoscaler channel,
678: by introducing isospin dependent polarization charges
679: obtained in the FH+RPA particle-vibration model
680: and parameterized in Ref.~\cite{Sagawa04}:
681: $\delta_{T=0}$=0.17 for $^{19}{\rm C}$ and 0.22 for $^{17}{\rm C}$.
682: Integrated DWBA cross sections are given
683: in Table~\ref{tbl:resonance_parameters}
684: for each transition listed.
685: The $J^{\pi}$ values are discussed below.
686:
687: In Fig.~\ref{fig:neut_19c_ad_plb},
688: the DWBA predictions of the differential cross section
689: leading to the 1.46 MeV state in $^{19}{\rm C}$ are shown
690: for three possible ground-state configurations.
691: The solid line was obtained by using the KD02 optical potential
692: for the supposed $1/2^+_1$$\rightarrow$$5/2^+_2$ transition,
693: while the dot-dashed line by using the JLM potential for the same transition.
694: %The JLM potential
695: The latter
696: was specifically derived
697: for the $p$+$^{19}{\rm C}$ system at $E_p$=70 MeV.
698: %using the method in Ref.~\cite{Tostevin99}.
699: These curves
700: agree closely with each other,
701: justifying an
702: %extrapolation
703: extrapolated use
704: in mass number of the KD02 potential
705: (the nominal
706: %applicable
707: range is $A$=27--209) down to the $A$=19 region
708: even for nuclei with large neutron/proton ratios.
709: %indicating that an extrapolated use in mass number $A$ of the KD02 potential
710: %(the nominal applicable range is $A$=27--209) down to the $A$=19 region
711: %seems to be justified even for nuclei with large neutron/proton ratios.
712: We therefore adopt the KD02 potential
713: below.
714: %in the present analysis.
715: %in the following.
716: %as for the present comparison.
717: %as far as the argument based on the cross section magnitude is concerned.
718: %are close to each other,
719: %showing small ambiguity
720: %due to the choice of the optical potential.
721: %showing the small ambiguity due to the choice of the optical potential.
722: Dashed and dotted curves
723: respectively assume $J^{\pi}_{\rm g.s.}$=$3/2^+_1$ and $5/2^+_1$,
724: and the same final state.
725: %and $5/2^+_2$ for the excited state.
726: These curves fail to reproduce
727: the magnitude of the cross section.
728: %the cross section magnitude.
729: Clearly,
730: the data are
731: %preferentially
732: much better described by
733: %in much better agreement with
734: the solid and dot-dashed curves
735: obtained with $J^{\pi}_{\rm g.s.}$=$1/2^+_1$.
736: If the 1.46 MeV levels is not $5/2^+_2$,
737: it might
738: %would
739: be identified with the $7/2^+_1$ state.
740: DWBA cross sections
741: exciting this $7/2^+_1$ state
742: from any of the members of the low-lying triplet,
743: %from either one of the ground triplet levels,
744: integrated up to $\theta_{\rm c.m.}$=64$^{\circ}$,
745: are, however, at most 4.2 mb (for 5/2$^+_1$$\rightarrow$$7/2^+_1$),
746: only 50\% of the data.
747: We thus conclude that the spin of the ground state of $^{19}{\rm C}$
748: is consistent with $J^{\pi}$=1/2$^+$~\cite{Nakamura99,Bazin95,Maddalena01},
749: and that of the 1.46 MeV state is $5/2^+$.
750:
751: In the study of the
752: $^{14}{\rm C}$($^{12}{\rm C}$,$^9{\rm C}$)$^{17}{\rm C}$
753: reaction~\cite{Bohlen07},
754: a state was observed at 2.06 MeV in $^{17}{\rm C}$,
755: which was assigned as either 3/2$^+_2$ or 7/2$^+_1$
756: using the results of shell model calculations.
757: Although there is a slight discrepancy in the excitation energies,
758: a possible counterpart of this state is the 2.20 MeV state
759: %observed
760: in the present $(p,p')$ study,
761: for which we examine
762: the two proposed $J^{\pi}$ assignments.
763: %the two cases of the spin.
764: Of all possible transitions connecting
765: the low-lying triplet of states
766: %the near-ground triplet states
767: and the ($3/2^+_2$, $7/2^+_1$) state,
768: it is found that only three have sizeable cross sections
769: when integrated up to $\theta_{\rm c.m.}$=64$^{\circ}$:
770: 2.3 mb for $1/2^+_1$$\rightarrow$$3/2^+_2$,
771: 2.7 mb for $3/2^+_1$$\rightarrow$$7/2^+_1$,
772: and 3.0 mb for $5/2^+_1$$\rightarrow$$7/2^+_1$.
773: The DWBA cross sections for other transitions
774: are at most 0.66 mb ($3/2^+_1$$\rightarrow$$3/2^+_2$).
775: Of the three the $1/2^+_1$$\rightarrow$$3/2^+_2$ case
776: is readily excluded since it has been clearly demonstrated in a $g$-factor
777: measurement that $J^{\pi}_{\rm g.s.}$ of $^{17}{\rm C}$
778: is different from $1/2^+$~\cite{Ogawa02}.
779: We are thus left with the $7/2^+_1$ assignment for the 2.20 MeV state.
780: DWBA predictions leading to this state
781: are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:neut_17c_ad_plb}
782: for three initial-state configurations:
783: solid line assumes $J^{\pi}_{\rm g.s.}$=$3/2^+_1$,
784: dashed one $5/2^+_1$, and dotted one $1/2^+_1$.
785: The $1/2^+_1$$\rightarrow$$7/2^+_1$ assumption
786: gives much lower cross sections than the data.
787: Of the remaining two
788: we see that
789: the $3/2^+_1$ assumption for the ground state better describes the data
790: by reproducing
791: the slope of the angular distribution,
792: %the angular distribution slope,
793: although
794: the $5/2^+_1$ assumption also gives a
795: reasonable
796: %moderate
797: description of the data.
798:
799: In Fig.~\ref{fig:neut_17c_ad_plb},
800: differential cross sections leading to the 3.05 MeV state
801: are also compared with DWBA predictions
802: obtained by assuming different configurations for the ground state,
803: and the $9/2^+_1$ state for the excited state.
804: This state was populated only weakly.
805: It had a sizeable cross section only at backward angles,
806: where transition amplitudes
807: with large angular momentum transfers are involved.
808: It could be identified as the $9/2^+$ state
809: reported at 3.10 MeV in the three-neutron transfer work~\cite{Bohlen07},
810: %It was
811: and
812: predicted at 3.01 MeV
813: %with a dominant stretched three-neutron (0$d$5/2)$^3$ configuration
814: in the present shell model calculations.
815: %with the WBT interaction.
816: The cross sections leading to this state
817: are in good agreement with the solid curve
818: calculated for the $3/2^+_1$$\rightarrow$$9/2^+_1$ transition,
819: excluding the possibility of $J^{\pi}_{\rm g.s.}$=$5/2^+_1$
820: for $^{17}{\rm C}$.
821: This further corroborates
822: the earlier $3/2^+$ assignments for the ground state
823: of this nucleus~\cite{Maddalena01,Ogawa02,Sauvan00-04,Pramanik03},
824: giving us confidence in the current procedure
825: employing the shell model wave functions and DWBA calculations.
826:
827: The 6.13 MeV state in $^{17}{\rm C}$
828: appears to correspond to the 6.20 MeV state reported close in energy
829: in the three-neutron transfer work~\cite{Bohlen07}.
830: In that study
831: %In the work
832: it was tentatively assigned as either $5/2^+_4$ or $5/2^+_5$,
833: with a preference for the latter assignment
834: due to larger occupancies predicted for the 0$d$ shells.
835: The $5/2^+_4$ and $5/2^+_5$ states are located
836: at 6.25 and 6.81 MeV, respectively,
837: in the present shell model calculations using the WBT interaction.
838: DWBA cross sections leading to the $5/2^+_4$ and $5/2^+_5$ states,
839: angle integrated up to $\theta_{\rm c.m.}$=64$^{\circ}$,
840: are 0.94 and 0.25 mb,
841: respectively.
842: The experimental value of 0.8(1) mb
843: favours the $5/2^+_4$ assignment for this state.
844: The $5/2^+_4$ state is predicted to have a large occupancy
845: of the 0$d$3/2 shell of 23\%,
846: which corresponds to almost one neutron in this shell,
847: in contrast to other lower energy states involved in this study:
848: 4\%, 4\%, and 6\% for the ground, $7/2^+_1$, and $9/2^+_1$ states,
849: respectively.
850: This indicates that promoting one neutron
851: from lower-lying
852: %the 0$d$5/2 and 1$s$1/2
853: shells
854: to the 0$d$3/2 shell
855: is the dominant excitation process of this state.
856: The deduced narrow width is consistent
857: with the reported value of $\Gamma_r$=0.35(15) MeV in Ref.~\cite{Bohlen07}.
858: %The candidates for this state from this study
859: %are the $5/2^+_3$ (4.00 MeV) and $7/2^+_2$ (5.35 MeV) shell model states.
860: %These states are predicted to have cross sections well comparable to the
861: %observed one, while the cross section leading to the $9/2^+_2$ (4.72 MeV)
862: %shell model state is calculated to be only 20\% of the experimental value.
863:
864: The $5/2^+_2$ shell model state at 1.72 MeV in $^{17}{\rm C}$
865: is not observed clearly
866: %could hardly be observed
867: presumably
868: due to the large expected width~\cite{Bohlen07}.
869: The angle integrated DWBA cross section leading to this state
870: from the $3/2^+_1$ ground state was calculated to be 0.69 mb.
871:
872: According to the argument of Ref.~\cite{Suzuki03a}
873: the spin of $J^{\pi}_{\rm g.s.}$=1/2$^+_1$ for $^{19}{\rm C}$
874: may imply a prolate intrinsic deformation for the ground state.
875: In terms of the Nilsson diagram this indicates that
876: four neutrons occupy the [220$\frac12$] and [211$\frac32$] orbits,
877: and one neutron occupies the [211$\frac12$] orbit in the ground state,
878: where [$Nn_z\Lambda \Omega$] are asymptotic quantum numbers
879: referring to large prolate deformations.
880: If one assumes that the observed $1/2^+$$\rightarrow$$5/2^+$ transition
881: is primarily associated with the promotion
882: of the least bound neutron in the [211$\frac12$] orbit
883: to the [202$\frac52$] orbit,
884: one would obtain a value for the quadrupole deformation parameter
885: of $\beta_2$$\approx$ 0.4,
886: by referring to neutron single-particle levels in a deformed Woods-Saxon
887: potential~\cite{Hamamoto07},
888: and by equating the excitation energy of 1.46 MeV
889: with the energy difference of the two Nilsson orbits.
890: Interestingly, this value is consistent with the result of more recent
891: deformed Skyrme HF calculations predicting a local prolate minimum
892: with $J^{\pi}$=$1/2^+$ at $\beta_2$=0.39~\cite{Sagawa04}.
893: In the HF calculation, however, the ground state was predicted
894: to be oblate with $\beta_2$=$-0.36$ and $J^{\pi}$=$3/2^+$,
895: and to be more bound by 2.05 MeV than the prolate minimum.
896: Moreover a local oblate minimum having $J^{\pi}$=$1/2^+$
897: with $\beta_2$=$-0.35$
898: was also predicted to be almost degenerate
899: with the $J^{\pi}$=$3/2^+$ ground state.
900: The present cross section for the $1/2^+$$\rightarrow$$5/2^+$ transition
901: observed in $^{19}{\rm C}$
902: will be useful in distinguishing between the two $1/2^+$ states
903: with different signs of $\beta_2$,
904: and provide
905: a clue to further investigate
906: %a hint on
907: the persistence of the new magic number $N$=16
908: proposed in oxygen isotopes~\cite{Ozawa00,Elekes07}
909: down to the carbon isotopes.
910: The HF model~\cite{Sagawa04}
911: gives a good account of
912: %correctly reproduces
913: the ground state spin of $3/2^+$ for $^{17}{\rm C}$.
914: It is of interest to see if it also
915: accounts for other states observed in this experiment.
916:
917: In summary,
918: we
919: have demonstrated
920: %could show
921: that
922: %the measurement of
923: the $(p,p')$ reaction
924: using the invariant mass method in inverse kinematics
925: leading to unbound resonance states in the residual nucleus
926: is feasible
927: for structure studies even for nuclei far from stability.
928: The measurements were made on $^{19,17}{\rm C}$ at 70 MeV/nucleon.
929: %to clarify the structure of the ground and low-lying states
930: %of these nuclei.
931: %low-lying structure of these nuclei
932: %including the respective ground states.
933: One resonance in $^{19}{\rm C}$ and three in $^{17}{\rm C}$
934: were observed above the particle decay threshold.
935: A DWBA analysis employing shell model wave functions
936: and modern nucleon-nucleus optical potentials
937: was used to identify the transitions observed.
938: The spin-parity of the ground state of $^{19}{\rm C}$
939: was found to be consistent with $1/2^+$,
940: and that of the strongly excited 1.46 MeV state
941: was assigned to be $5/2^+_2$.
942: For $^{17}{\rm C}$ the observed states
943: corresponded well
944: %had a good correspondence
945: with those reported
946: in a three-neutron transfer study~\cite{Bohlen07}.
947: By adding information from this experiment
948: spin-parity assignments of 7/2$^+_1$ for the 2.20 MeV state and
949: 5/2$^+_4$ for the 6.13 MeV state were made.
950: %the spins of the 2.20 and 6.13 MeV states
951: %were assigned to be 7/2$^+_1$ and 5/2$^+_4$, respectively.
952: The spectroscopic information from this study
953: will impose stringent constraints on further theoretical investigations
954: of light neutron-rich nuclei in this region.
955:
956: The authors
957: %gratefully
958: acknowledge
959: %It is a pleasure to acknowledge
960: invaluable assistance of the staff of RARF during the experiment,
961: particularly, Dr.~Y.~Yano, Dr.~A.~Goto, and Dr.~M.~Kase,
962: and useful discussions with Professor I.~Hamamoto
963: and Professor J.~A.~Tostevin.
964: This work was supported, in part,
965: by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research
966: (Nos.~15540257 and 15740145) from MEXT Japan.
967:
968: % The Appendices part is started with the command \appendix;
969: % appendix sections are then done as normal sections
970: % \appendix
971:
972: % \section{}
973: % \label{}
974:
975: \clearpage
976:
977: \begin{thebibliography}{00}
978:
979: % \bibitem{label}
980: % Text of bibliographic item
981:
982:
983: % notes:
984: % \bibitem{label} \note
985:
986: % subbibitems:
987: % \begin{subbibitems}{label}
988: % \bibitem{label1}
989: % \bibitem{label2}
990: % If there is a note, it should come last:
991: % \bibitem{label3} \note
992: % \end{subbibitems}
993:
994: \bibitem{Tanihata85}
995: I.~Tanihata {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 55}, 2676 (1985).
996: \bibitem{Nakamura94-06}
997: T.~Nakamura {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 331}, 296 (1994);
998: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 96}, 252502 (2006).
999: \bibitem{Adrich05}
1000: P.~Adrich {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 95}, 132501 (2005).
1001: %\bibitem{Leistenschneider01}
1002: %A.~Leistenschneider {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 86}, 5442 (2001).
1003: \bibitem{Iwasaki00}
1004: H.~Iwasaki {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 481}, 7 (2000).
1005: \bibitem{Ozawa00}
1006: A.~Ozawa {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 84}, 5493 (2000).
1007: \bibitem{Imai04}
1008: N.~Imai {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 92}, 062501 (2004).
1009: \bibitem{Elekes04}
1010: Z.~Elekes {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 586}, 34 (2004).
1011: \bibitem{Elekes07}
1012: Z.~Elekes {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 98}, 102502 (2007).
1013: %\bibitem{Ong06}
1014: %H.~J.~Ong {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Rev.\ C {\bf 73}, 024610 (2006).
1015: \bibitem{Suzuki03a}
1016: T.~Suzuki {\it et al.}, in the {\it Proceedings of the International Symposium
1017: on Frontiers of Collective Motions (CM2002)},
1018: edited by H.~Sagawa and H.~Iwasaki
1019: (World Scientific, Singapore, 2003), p.\ 236.
1020: \bibitem{Sagawa04}
1021: H.~Sagawa {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Rev.\ C {\bf 70}, 054316 (2004).
1022: \bibitem{Jahn37}
1023: H.~A.~Jahn and E.~Teller, Proc.\ R.\ Soc.\ London, Ser.\ A {\bf 161},
1024: 220 (1937).
1025: \bibitem{Suzuki03b}
1026: T.~Suzuki {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Rev.\ C {\bf 68}, 014317 (2003).
1027: \bibitem{Audi03}
1028: G.~Audi, A.~H.~Wapstra, and C.~Thibault,
1029: Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf A729}, 337 (2003).
1030: \bibitem{Nakamura99}
1031: T.~Nakamura {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 83}, 1112 (1999).
1032: \bibitem{Bazin95}
1033: D.~Bazin {\it et al.}, Phy.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 74}, 3569 (1995).
1034: \bibitem{Maddalena01}
1035: V.~Maddalena {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Rev.\ C {\bf 63}, 024613 (2001).
1036: \bibitem{Kanungo05}
1037: R.~Kanungo {\it et al.}, Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf A757}, 315 (2005).
1038: \bibitem{Bazin98}
1039: D.~Bazin {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Rev.\ C {\bf 57}, 2156 (1998).
1040: \bibitem{Baumann98}
1041: T.~Baumann {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 439}, 256 (1998).
1042: \bibitem{Smedberg99}
1043: M.~H.~Smedberg and M.~V.~Zhukov, Phys.\ Rev.\ C {\bf 59}, 2048 (1999).
1044: \bibitem{Ogawa02}
1045: H.~Ogawa {\it et al.}, Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ A {\bf 13}, 81 (2002).
1046: \bibitem{Sauvan00-04}
1047: E.~Sauvan {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 491}, 1 (2000);
1048: Phys.\ Rev.\ C {\bf 69}, 044603 (2004).
1049: \bibitem{Pramanik03}
1050: U.~Datta Pramanik {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 551}, 63 (2003).
1051: \bibitem{Elekes05}
1052: Z.~Elekes {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 614}, 174 (2005).
1053: \bibitem{Bohlen07}
1054: H.~G.~Bohlen {\it et al.}, Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ A {\bf 31}, 279 (2007).
1055: \bibitem{Kubo92}
1056: T.~Kubo, {\it et al.}, Nucl.\ Instrum.\ Methods Phys.\ Res.\ B {\bf 70},
1057: 309 (1992).
1058: \bibitem{Ryuto06}
1059: H.~Ryuto, {\it et al.}, Nucl.\ Instrum.\ Methods Phys.\ Res.\ A {\bf 555},
1060: 1 (2006).
1061: \bibitem{Taddeucci90}
1062: T.~N.~Taddeucci {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Rev.\ C {\bf 41}, 2548 (1990).
1063: \bibitem{Fukuda04}
1064: N.~Fukuda {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Rev.\ C {\bf 70} 054606 (2004).
1065: \bibitem{Sugimoto06}
1066: T.~Sugimoto {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 654}, 160 (2007).
1067: \bibitem{Kondo07}
1068: Y.~Kondo, Doctoral Dissertation, Tokyo Institute of Technology, (2007).
1069: \bibitem{Stanoiu04}
1070: M.~Stanoiu {\it et al.}, Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ A {\bf 20}, 95 (2004).
1071: \bibitem{Tilley93}
1072: D.~R.~Tilley, H.~R.~Weller, and C.~M.~Cheves,
1073: Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf A564}, 1 (1993).
1074: \bibitem{Lane-Thomas58}
1075: A.~M.~Lane and R.~G.~Thomas, Rev.\ Mod.\ Phys.\ {\bf 30}, 257 (1958).
1076: \bibitem{Bohr68}
1077: A.~Bohr and B.~R.~Mottelson, {\it Nuclear Structure}
1078: (Benjamin, New York, 1969), Vol.~1, p.\ 441.
1079: \bibitem{OXBASH88}
1080: The shell model code OXBASH, B.~A.~Brown {\it et al.},
1081: {\it NSUCL Report} {\bf 524} (1988).
1082: \bibitem{Warburton92}
1083: E.~K.~Warburton and B.~A.~Brown, Phys.\ Rev.\ C {\bf 46}, 923 (1992).
1084: \bibitem{Millener75}
1085: D.~J.~Millener and D.~Kurath, Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf A255}, 315 (1975).
1086: \bibitem{Raynal70}
1087: Program DWBA70, R.~Schaeffer and J.~Raynal (unpublished);
1088: Extended version DW81, J.~R.~Comfort (unpublished).
1089: \bibitem{Koning03}
1090: A.~J.~Koning and J.~P.~Delaroche, Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf A713}, 231 (2003).
1091: \bibitem{Garcia05}
1092: A.~Garc\'{i}a-Camacho, R.~C.~Johnson, and J.~A.~Tostevin,
1093: Phys.\ Rev.\ C {\bf 71}, 044606 (2005).
1094: \bibitem{JLM77}
1095: J.~P.~Jeukenne, A.~Lejeune, and C.~Mahaux, Phys.\ Rev.\ C {\bf 16}, 80 (1977).
1096: %\bibitem{Tostevin99}
1097: %J.~A.~Tostevin, in the {\it Proceedings of the second International
1098: %Conference on Fission and Neutron Rich Nuclei},
1099: %edited by W.~Philips
1100: %(World Scientific, Singapore, 1999), p.\ 735.
1101: \bibitem{Bertsch77}
1102: G.~Bertsch {\it et al.}, Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf A284}, 399 (1977).
1103: \bibitem{Ozawa01}
1104: A.~Ozawa, T.~Suzuki, and I.~Tanihata, Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf A693}, 32 (2001).
1105: \bibitem{Hamamoto07}
1106: I.~Hamamoto, Phys.\ Rev.\ C {\bf 76}, 054319 (2007).
1107: %arXiv:0708.2689 [nucl-th], and Phys.\ Rev.\ C, in print.
1108: %to be published in Phys.\ Rev.\ C.
1109: %private communication.
1110: %RIKEN Lecture Series on Nuclear Physics; \\
1111: %http://rarfaxp.riken.jp/\~{ }seminar/Lecture/hamamoto070918-0919/riken-lec-sept07.pdf
1112: \end{thebibliography}
1113: \end{document}
1114: