Re-examination of the β-decay properties of As isotopes

Abdul Kabir, Jameel-Un Nabi, Wajeeha Khalid, Hamad Almujibah

Communications in Theoretical Physics ›› 2025, Vol. 77 ›› Issue (3) : 35302.

PDF(421 KB)
Welcome to visit Communications in Theoretical Physics, March 27, 2025
PDF(421 KB)
Communications in Theoretical Physics ›› 2025, Vol. 77 ›› Issue (3) : 35302. DOI: 10.1088/1572-9494/ad8dba
Nuclear Physics

Re-examination of the β-decay properties of As isotopes

Author information +
History +

Abstract

The β-decay properties of 67−80As nuclei have been investigated within the framework of the proton–neutron quasi-particle random phase approximation (pn-QRPA) model. The nuclear deformation obtained from the finite range droplet model is used as an input parameter in the pn-QRPA model for the analysis of β-decay properties including Gamow–Teller strength distributions, log ft, β-decay half-lives and stellar β± decay rates. The predicted log ft values were fairly consistent with the observed data. The computed β-decay half-lives matched the measured values by a factor of 10. The stellar rates were compared with the shell model outcomes. At high densities and temperatures, the β+ and electron capture rates had a finite contribution. However, the β and positron capture rates are only significant at high temperatures and low densities. The pn-QRPA rates outperformed the shell model rates by a factor of 22 or more.

Key words

pn-QRPA / β-decay properties / GT strength distribution / log ft / stellar rates

Cite this article

Download Citations
Abdul Kabir, Jameel-Un Nabi, Wajeeha Khalid, et al. Re-examination of the β-decay properties of As isotopes[J]. Communications in Theoretical Physics, 2025, 77(3): 35302 https://doi.org/10.1088/1572-9494/ad8dba

1. Introduction

Accurate measurements and reliable theoretical calculations of the properties of low-energy nuclear structure play a vital role in the modeling and comprehension of fundamental nuclear phenomena. These include β-decays, which are closely linked to stellar nucleosynthesis. The β-decay characteristics are calculated from the perspective of theory, and so serve as a standard for theoretical models as they are sensitive to the wave functions in the parent and daughter states. The unique features of low-lying excitation energies and decay patterns found in neutron-rich nuclei around A = 100 and possessing N ≈ 60 are especially intriguing, holding importance for both studies of nuclear structure and astrophysical investigations [1, 2]. In these nuclei, shape dynamics may occur. Furthermore, these properties contribute to the rapid neutron capture (r-) process, which accounts for the production of heavy elements via nucleosynthesis in explosive scenarios. The r-process is responsible for producing around 50% of the nuclei that are more massive than iron [3, 4]. Radioactive ion beams are widely used in major experimental facilities across the world to accurately measure the β-decay half-lives of neutron-rich nuclei. Researchers have studied the β-decay properties of several neutron-rich nuclei including Ge and As [57]. Due to limited data from experiments, theoretical models have been used to study the β-decay rates of neutron-rich nuclei. Theoretical attempts to define low-lying nuclear states and their decay properties have encountered substantial difficulties. The decay process has been studied theoretically utilizing several nuclear models. A few models that are often utilized to accomplish these computations include the interacting boson model (IBM) [8], the quasi-particle random phase approximation (QRPA) [9, 10], the large-scale shell model (LSSM) [11] and the potential model [12, 13]. The structure of odd-A energy levels and the electromagnetic properties of 69,71,73As and 69,71,73Ge were studied in the context of the proton–neutron interacting boson–fermion model (pn-IBFM) [14]. Furthermore, the β-decay properties of neutron-rich nuclei have been studied by employing the deformed pn-QRPA [15]. The impact of finite-range tensor forces for even–even semi-magic/magic nuclei on the low-lying Gamow–Teller (GT) state and β-decay half-lives [1619]. The β-decay and electron capture (EC) rates of Mn isotopes in the mass range A = 53–63 have been determined using the pn-QRPA [20]. The nuclear structural characteristics and β-decay half-lives of exotic proton-rich waiting point nuclei in the mass range A ≈ 70 have been examined using both the pn-QRPA and the interacting boson model-1 (IBM-1) [21].
Using a microscopic nuclear theory, Klapdor-Kleingrothaus et al [22] were the first to determine β-decay rates for several nuclei that are far from the line of stability. Later, this framework was employed to compute the β-decay half-lives of over 6000 nuclei rich in neutrons, spanning a wide range from the line of stability to the neutron drip line [23]. A microscopic computation of the β+/electron capture rates of neutron-deficient nuclei with Z = 10–108, up to the proton drip line for over 2000 nuclei, was performed using the same pn-QRPA model, which has a separable and schematic interaction [24]. The modest interaction rates have greatly aided our comprehension of the r-process. Fuller et al [25] calculated rates at stellar temperatures and densities, focusing on decays from excited states of parent nuclei. We utilize the deformed basis pn-QRPA models to provide a reliable description of the nuclear structure and β-decay properties of As isotopes. The proposed model is capable of finding the β-decay properties [26] and microscopic calculation of weak rates for any arbitrary heavy nucleus [27, 28].
We have investigated the β-decay properties of selected As isotopes (including the terrestrial β-decay half-lives, GT strength distributions, log ft values and stellar rates) by focusing on their dependence on deformation by employing the theoretical framework of the deformed pn-QRPA model. The β-decay properties for each As isotope were analyzed as a function of the quadrupole deformation parameter β2. In isotopes with mass numbers between 67 and 80 there exist prolate, spherical and oblate shapes, corresponding to β > 0, β = 0 and β < 0, respectively. Particular characteristics may be seen in the β-decay properties computed at each equilibrium deformation. The goal of this study is to identify possible indicators of nuclear shape in the β-decay characteristics of As nuclei within 67 ≤ A ≤ 80. The results of the present model-based analysis were compared with previously observed and predicted data.
The paper is arranged as follows. In section 2, we give a brief discussion of the pn-QRPA model used to compute nuclear structure and β-decay features. Section 3 offers our findings and pertinent discussion. Section 4 summarizes the results of the present examination.

2. Formalism

The pn-QRPA model was used to study the β-decay characteristics of As nuclei. The Hamiltonian of the pn-QRPA model can be described using
HQRPA=Hsp+Vpair+VGTpp+VGTph.
(1)
The Hamiltonian for a single particle is denoted as Hsp, while Vpair  represents the interaction between nucleons. The term VGTpp corresponds to the particle–particle (pp) interactions and VGTph corresponds to the particle–hole (ph) GT interactions. The wave functions and energy of a single particle were determined utilizing the Nilsson model [29]. The oscillator constant for the nucleon was calculated as ω = (45A−1/3 − 25A−2/3). Other variables associated with the model include β2, pairing gaps, Nilsson potential parameters (NPP), GT force variables and Q-values. The NPP was modified from [30] and Q-values were obtained using mass excess values [31]. To get proton and neutron quasi-particle energies and occupancy probability, the BCS computations were solved with pairing gaps obtained utilizing the relation.
Δnn=18(1)AZ+1[2Sn(A+1,Z)4Sn(A,Z)+2Sn(A1,Z)],
(2)
Δpp=18(1)1+Z[2Sp(A+1,Z+1)4Sp(A,Z)+2Sp(A1,Z1)],
(3)
where Sp is the proton separation energy and Sn is the neutron separation energy. The current pn-QRPA model has the limitation of ignoring the p–n pairing effect, and incorporation of p–n pairing may be the topic of future work. The present paper included the nn and pp pairing correlations, which have only an isovector contribution. For the isoscalar (IS) part, one must include the p–n pairing correlations, which was not considered in the present manuscript. The conclusions of the study in [32] state that IS interaction behaves in a way like the tensor force (TF) interaction. The study was performed only for N = Z + 2 nuclei. The IS interaction may impact the GT computation in a way similar to that of TF interaction, provided that the conclusions of the study can be generalized to any arbitrary nucleus (including N= Z). The calculations of [32] showed that TF shifts the GT peak to low excitation energies. Incorporation of TF may result in lower centroid values of calculated GT strength distributions and could lead to higher values of calculated β-decay rates. The same effect of shifting calculated β-strength to lower excitation energies in the current pn-QRPA model was achieved by incorporation of particle–particle forces [24]. To summarize, our model has the shortcoming of not incorporating the p–n pairing effect. The pp forces in the GT residual interaction take care of this missing effect.
The β2 values were obtained from [33]. The GT force parameters were taken from [34]. For details of the pairing force and residual interaction as well as solution of equation (1) one can consult [35].
The partial half-lives t1/2 and log ft were determined as
t1/2=C(gA/gV)2fA(A,Z,E)BGT(ω)+fV(A,Z,E)BF(ω),
(4)
logft=logCBGT(ω)+BF(ω),
(5)
where C = 6143 s [36]. The ratio gA/gV = −1.2694 [37], E = (Qω) and Q was taken from [31]. ω is the excitation energy of the QRPA phonon determined by solving the random phase approximation matrix equation. fV(A, Z, E) is the phase space factor for the vector transitions and fA(A, Z, E) is the phase space integrals for the axial vector transitions. The phase space integrals contains the lepton kinematics. These were analyzed utilizing the formula mentioned in [38]. BGT is the reduced GT transition probability and BF is the reduced GT Fermi transition probability. The β-decay terrestrial half-lives were computed by adding up the inverses of the partial half-lives and taking the inverse
T1/2=(0ωQ(1t1/2))1.
(6)
From parent level n to daughter state m, the stellar weak rate was calculated utilizing
λmnβ±/EC/PC=ln2fmnβ±/EC/PC(ρ,T,Ef)(ft)mn.
(7)
One may view more information on the solution to equation (1) in [39, 40]. The sum of the stellar rates was calculated using
λβ±/EC/PC=mnPmλmnβ±/EC/PC,
(8)
where Pm, which was calculated using the Boltzmann distribution, is the occupancy probability of the parent excited state. We continued to sum the initial and final states until our rate computation reached the necessary degree of convergence.

3. Results and discussion

The pn-QRPA model was applied to examine the β-decay half-lives of 67−80As nuclei. Table 1 displays the terrestrial decay modes, Q-values [31], deformation parameters β2 and pairing gap values for 67−80As. Q-values drop for odd-A and odd–odd isotopes for β+ decay as the mass number increases. The Q-values begin to rise in the β direction for both the odd-A and odd–odd isotopes of As once they pass the stable 75As nucleus. Self-consistent calculations of the β-decay characteristics were performed utilizing the pn-QRPA model with the nuclear deformations obtained from [33] as an input parameter.
Table 1. Modes of terrestrial decay and pn-QRPA model parameters for 67−80As (EC, electron capture).
Nucleus Decay mode Qβ (MeV) β2 Δpp (MeV) Δnn (MeV)
67As β+ 6.0868 0.2200 1.6478 0.4330
68As β+ 8.0843 −0.2870 1.0123 1.0407
69As β+ 3.9907 −0.2970 1.6642 1.2249
70As β+ 6.2280 −0.2670 1.0901 1.3316
71As β+ 2.0137 −0.2580 1.6368 1.3892
72As β+ 4.3559 −0.2580 1.0867 1.4020
73As EC 0.3445 −0.2380 1.7432 1.3004
74As β+ 2.5623 −0.2380 1.2233 1.2707
75As Stable −0.8647 −0.2380 1.6793 1.2959
76As β 2.9605 −0.2480 1.3112 1.3211
77As β 0.6832 0.1730 1.6137 1.2729
78As β 4.2089 0.1730 1.2021 1.1606
79As β 2.2814 0.1740 1.6112 1.0395
80As β 5.5445 0.1730 1.1574 0.9948
Figure 1 compares the pn-QRPA-predicted GT+ strength with outcomes from experiments [41, 42] for 69,70As isotopes. The measured data were accessible up to excitation energies of 0.39 MeV and 5.37 MeV for 69As and 70As, respectively. We have also shown the calculated GT distributions inside the cut-off energies (3.99 MeV for 69As and 6.22 MeV for 70As). The low-lying transitions are consistent with the observed data for 69As. The observed data for the decay of 70As range from 2.0 MeV to 5.5 MeV. The predicted GT distributions are not considerably split for the case of 70As. The present pn-QRPA model only analyzes 1p–1h correlations. Figure 1 demonstrates that the pn-QRPA-predicted GT strength distributions are more consistent with the experimental data at lower excitation energies.
Figure 1. Comparison of the pn-QRPA-calculated GT strength distributions of 69As and 70As with experimental data [41, 42]. The abscissa shows daughter excitation energy within the Q-window.

Full size|PPT slide

Figure 2 compares the pn-QRPA calculated half-lives with the measured data of [31] for the selected As isotopes. It is obvious that high GT intensities cause low values of half-life and vice versa. It is clear from figure 1 that for odd–odd cases the GT intensities are maximum, so for the odd–odd cases the β-decay half-lives are minimum. Figure 3 displays the ratios of pn-QRPA computed to measured half-lives. The calculated half-lives are reproduced within a factor of 10 of the measured half-lives. This indicates good accuracy of the underlying nuclear model. The pn-QRPA model accurately predicts β-decay half-lives for neutron-rich nuclei.
Figure 2. Comparison of the pn-QRPA-calculated half-lives of As isotopes with experimental data [31].

Full size|PPT slide

Figure 3. Ratio of the calculated to measured [31] half-lives for As isotopes.

Full size|PPT slide

Table 2 compares the pn-QRPA-based computed log ft for β+/EC of odd-A As nuclei with those of observed data [43] and earlier predictions [pn-IBFM-2 [18] and self-consistent mean-field (IBFM-2-SCMF) calculations [44]]. The pn-QRPA-based calculated log ft values correlate well with the observed data. For most transitions, the IBFM-2 predictions are lower than the measured values. The log ft values estimated by the IBFM-2-SCMF model, which are sensitive to the wave functions for the initial and final states, were consistently greater than the IBFM-2 values. The largest deviation occurs, for example, in the case of 67As(5/21+) → 67Ge(3/22+) decay. In particular, the computed log ft is a factor of 1.52 larger than the experimental data because pn-QRPA predicted a GT strength as small as 0.000 01. The agreement with the experimental data was evaluated through the calculation of root mean square (rms) errors. The rms error for the present pn-QRPA-based prediction is 1.06 while for IBFM-2 and IBFM-2-SCMF the rms errors are 1.34 and 1.31, respectively. This indicates that pn-QRPA predictions are within the range of observed values. The IBFM-2 framework relies significantly on empirical variables for the even–even IBM-2 core Hamiltonian. As a result, phenomenological single-particle energies were employed in the IBFM-2 computation. The IBFM-2-SCMF model utilized energy density functional computations to estimate the majority of the parameters.
Table 2. An examination of predicted and observed [43] log ft values for β+/EC decays of odd-A As isotopes. The last three columns display the predictions via pn-QRPA, IBFM-2 [18] and IBFM-2-SCMF [44], respectively.
log ft
Decay IiIf Exp. [43] pn-QRPA IBFM-2 [18] IBFM-2-SCMF [44]
67As → 67Ge 5/215/21 5.44 6.10 4.15
5/215/22 5.92 5.62 6.63
5/215/23 6.40 5.89 6.08
5/213/21 6.18 6.04 6.49
5/213/22 5.64 8.58 7.61
69As → 69Ge 5/215/21 5.49 6.74 4.26 4.77
5/215/22 6.94 6.65 6.65 6.92
5/215/23 6.80 5.91 5.33 5.63
5/215/24 6.47 5.89 5.49 5.98
5/215/25 5.95 6.68 7.15
5/213/21 6.05 5.66 5.88 7.58
5/213/22 7.21 6.10 7.90 7.44
5/213/23 6.71 6.07 5.07 6.43
5/213/24 5.82 6.86 6.46 7.07
5/213/25 6.21 6.42 6.73 8.00
5/217/21 6.20 5.68 7.54 10.85
5/217/22 5.72 7.46
71As → 71Ge 5/215/21 5.85 7.63 4.60 5.92
5/215/22 7.33 6.08 6.28
5/215/23 6.86 6.59 5.63 6.55
5/215/24 9.14 7.80 5.55 7.74
5/215/25 6.96 6.98 6.84
5/213/21 7.19 6.05 6.52 6.74
5/213/22 >8.60 6.83 7.79 7.47
5/213/23 6.33 6.83 5.73 7.24
5/213/24 7.43 6.83 5.21 8.25
5/213/25 6.94 6.54 7.34 8.10
5/217/21 8.79 6.54 7.6 8.38
5/217/22 7.29 6.54 7.85
73As → 73Ge 3/211/21 5.40 5.33 3.82
Similarly, table 3 compares predicted and observed log ft values for β+/EC transitions of odd–odd As nuclei. The IBFM-2 model was not capable of computing the log ft values for odd–odd nuclei. For the decay 68As → 68Ge, our calculated log ft values are smaller than the measured ones. This is due to the fact that GT intensities are comparatively higher, which inversely affects the half-lives and the log ft values. The pn-QRPA-calculated log ft are within the limit of measured data for 70As. For example, the greatest discrepancy exists in the case of the 68Ge(31+) → 68As(24+) decay. In particular, the computed log ft is a factor of 1.71 smaller than the measured value. This is because the pn-QRPA-predicted the GT strength to be larger than 0.226 30. More fragmentations occur in this decay. The rms errors for pn-QRPA and IBFM-2-SCMF are 1.76 and 1.34, respectively.
Table 3. An examination of predicted and observed [43] log ft values for β+/EC decays of odd–odd As isotopes. The last two columns display theoretical values predicted with the pn-QRPA, and IBFM-2-SCMF [44] models, respectively.
log ft
Decay IiIf Exp. [43] pn-QRPA IBFM-2-SCMF [44]
68As → 68Ge 31+21+ 7.38 4.64 6.66
31+22+ 6.86 4.53 6.95
31+23+ 6.89 4.37 6.34
31+24+ 7.24 4.23 5.81
31+25+ 6.57 5.41 7.21
31+41+ 7.02 5.86 6.34
31+42+ 6.74 5.58 5.73
31+43+ 5.97 4.82 6.63
70As → 70Ge 41+41+ 7.30 6.38 6.58
41+42+ 7.37 6.40 6.03
41+43+ 5.69 4.77 6.01
41+31+ 6.97 6.05 10.74
The time derivative of the lepton-to-baryon ratio Ye is an important quantity to keep track of throughout the pre-supernova evolution of a massive star. It is provided by
Y˙e(β+PC)=τAλ(β+PC),
(9)
Y˙e(β++EC)=τAλ(β++EC),
(10)
where τ represents the abundance of the nucleus and A represents its mass number. PC is positron capture. It is seen that (β+ + EC) contributes negatively to Y˙e whereas the (β + PC) rates contribute positively. For the analysis of stellar weak rates, we have utilized the pn-QRPA model with nuclear deformations taken from [33] to determine the β±, EC and PC rates of 67−80As. We have calculated stellar weak rates that are completely microscopic in nature. The so-called Brink–Axel hypothesis [45] was not applied in our computation for the GT strength distributions of excited states. The stellar weak rates were compiled utilizing the independent-particle model (IPM) for 226 nuclei within A = 21–60 [25]. Later, the data were compiled via the same model within A = 65–80 [46]. The authors improved their treatment for high-temperature partition functions and adjusted the location of GT centroids from [25] in the updated computation. The computations, referred to as IPM-03 from now on, were based on the Brink–Axel hypothesis. The pn-QRPA stellar rates are calculated and displayed in tables 4 and 5. We display (β+ + EC) and (β + PC) along with the IPM-03 calculations at all densities and temperatures. It is obvious that the stellar rates increase with core temperature. This happens because a parent state’s occupancy probability increases with temperature, making a sufficient contribution to the weak rates. As the density of the star core evolves by orders of magnitude, the (β++ EC) rates rise owing to an elevation in electron chemical potential. On the contrary, the (β+ PC) rates decrease with increasing core densities due to a significant reduction in the accessible phase space (positrons have a negative degeneracy parameter). The (β++ EC) rates are only significant at high temperatures and densities. The pn-QRPA rates are up to 22 times greater than the IPM-03 rates because electron and positron pair generation probabilities are maximum at higher temperatures, for example in 80As. Similarly, table 5 displays that the (β+ PC) rates make a finite contribution only at high temperatures and low densities. This is due to the Pauli blocking effect at large densities, as well as the substantial reduction in phase space as noted above. It is noted that the IPM-03 rates are lower than the pn-QRPA rates. In the IPM-03 calculation, the sum of the partition function had several states without accompanying weak interaction strengths. The likely cause of the lower rates in the IPM-03 analysis might be the handling of partition functions and the quenching of GT strength.
Table 4. Calculated sum of β+ and EC stellar rates for As isotopes as a function of core temperature and density values in units of s−1. The temperatures (T9) and densities (ρ) are given in units of 109 K and g cm–3, respectively. Calculated rates are compared with the previous IPM-03 calculation [46].
67As 68As 69As
ρ T9 λpnQRPA(β++EC) λIPM03(β++EC) [46] λpnQRPA(β++EC) λIPM03(β++EC) [46] λpnQRPA(β++EC) λIPM03(β++EC) [46]
103 3 2.56 × 10−02 6.49 × 10−02 7.95 × 10−02 5.37 × 10−02 4.60 × 10−03 8.61 × 10−03
10 1.06 × 10+00 8.50 × 10−01 2.71 × 10+00 7.10 × 10−01 3.47 × 10−01 4.19 × 10−01
30 8.84 × 10+02 2.48 × 10+02 1.36 × 10+03 4.46 × 10+02 4.11 × 10+02 1.84 × 10+02
107 3 6.26 × 10−02 9.39 × 10+02 2.04 × 10−01 1.02 × 10−01 2.68 × 10−02 4.44 × 10−02
10 1.28 × 10+00 1.01 × 10+00 3.28 × 10+00 8.31 × 10−01 4.29 × 10−01 5.15 × 10−01
30 8.90 × 10+02 2.50 × 10+02 1.37 × 10+03 4.49 × 10+02 4.14 × 10+02 1.85 × 10+02
1011 3 7.43 × 10+04 6.43 × 10+04 1.26 × 10+05 5.45 × 10+04 8.02 × 10+04 4.80 × 10+04
10 1.81 × 10+05 6.85 × 10+04 3.08 × 10+05 5.71 × 10+04 1.11 × 10+05 4.98 × 10+04
30 6.50 × 10+05 1.13 × 10+05 8.91 × 10+05 1.77 × 10+05 3.53 × 10+05 8.67 × 10+04
70As 71As 72As
ρ T9 λpnQRPA(β++EC) λIPM03(β++EC) [46] λpnQRPA(β++EC) λIPM03(β++EC) [46] λpnQRPA(β++EC) λIPM03(β++EC) [46]
103 3 2.27 × 10−02 8.48 × 10−03 1.75 × 10−04 3.63 × 10−04 4.08 × 10−04 8.60 × 10−04
10 1.61 × 10+00 3.12 × 10−01 1.06 × 10−01 1.81 × 10−01 3.18 × 10−01 1.35 × 10−01
30 1.40 × 10+03 3.17 × 10+02 2.28 × 10+02 1.01 × 10+02 5.13 × 10+02 2.02 × 10+02
107 3 1.33 × 10−01 3.98 × 10−02 4.23 × 10−03 1.18 × 10−02 9.75 × 10−03 1.21 × 10−02
10 1.98 × 10+00 4.29 × 10−04 1.32 × 10−01 2.23 × 10−01 3.96 × 10−01 1.67 × 10−01
30 1.41 × 10+03 3.19 × 10+02 2.30 × 10+02 1.02 × 10+02 5.18 × 10+02 2.04 × 10+02
1011 3 1.96 × 10+05 3.54 × 10+04 5.21 × 10+04 2.34 × 10+04 8.36 × 10+04 1.78 × 10+04
10 3.69 × 10+05 3.61 × 10+04 7.98 × 10+04 2.46 × 10+04 1.82 × 10+05 1.82 × 10+04
30 1.15 × 10+06 1.27 × 10+05 2.52 × 10+05 4.91 × 10+04 5.53 × 10+05 8.07 × 10+04
73As 74As 75As
ρ T9 λpnQRPA(β++EC) λIPM03(β++EC) [46] λpnQRPA(β++EC) λIPM03(β++EC) [46] λpnQRPA(β++EC) λIPM03(β++EC) [46]
103 3 1.34 × 10−05 3.52 × 10+04 2.22 × 10−05 2.86 × 10−04 1.32 × 10−07 3.29 × 10−07
10 3.03 × 10−02 4.84 × 10−02 1.16 × 10−01 1.34 × 10−01 8.43 × 10−03 1.46 × 10−02
30 1.75 × 10+02 6.36 × 10+01 4.60 × 10+02 1.46 × 10+02 1.44 × 10+02 4.60 × 10+01
107 3 4.75 × 10−04 1.12 × 10−03 8.95 × 10−04 9.87 × 10−03 6.47 × 10−06 1.67 × 10−05
10 3.79 × 10−02 6.02 × 10−02 1.45 × 10−01 1.67 × 10−01 1.06 × 10−02 1.83 × 10−02
30 1.76 × 10+02 6.40 × 10+01 4.65 × 10+02 1.47 × 10+02 1.45 × 10+02 4.63 × 10+01
1011 3 3.98 × 10+04 1.47 × 10+04 7.29 × 10+04 1.87 × 10+04 3.53 × 10+04 1.22 × 10+04
10 5.81 × 10+04 1.49 × 10+04 1.81 × 10+05 1.91 × 10+04 5.43 × 10+04 1.24 × 10+04
30 2.43 × 10+05 3.22 × 10+04 6.15 × 10+05 6.21 × 10+04 2.42 × 10+05 2.58 × 10+04
76As 77As 78As
ρ T9 λpnQRPA(β++EC) λIPM03(β++EC) [46] λpnQRPA(β++EC) λIPM03(β++EC) [46] λpnQRPA(β++EC) λIPM03(β++EC) [46]
103 3 1.77 × 10−07 1.63 × 10−05 1.00 × 10−09 1.76 × 10−09 1.23 × 10−14 4.84 × 10−07
10 2.69 × 10−02 5.41 × 10−02 1.83 × 10−03 3.67 × 10−03 1.41 × 10−03 1.33 × 10−02
30 3.27 × 10+02 1.01 × 10+02 1.26 × 10+02 3.16 × 10+01 2.69 × 10+02 6.16 × 10+01
107 3 8.93 × 10−06 7.43 × 10−04 5.13 × 10−08 9.12 × 10−08 6.38 × 10−13 2.43 × 10−05
10 3.37 × 10−02 6.77 × 10−02 2.30 × 10−03 4.59 × 10−03 1.77 × 10−03 1.67 × 10−02
30 3.30 × 10+02 1.02 × 10+02 1.27 × 10+02 3.18 × 10+01 2.71 × 10+02 6.22 × 10+01
1011 3 9.25 × 10+04 1.59 × 10+04 2.72 × 10+04 9.89 × 10+03 6.04 × 10+04 1.22 × 10+04
10 1.84 × 10+05 1.62 × 10+04 4.42 × 10+04 9.93 × 10+03 1.58 × 10+05 1.25 × 10+04
30 5.53 × 10+05 4.65 × 10+04 2.33 × 10+05 1.98 × 10+4 5.38 × 10+05 3.18 × 10+04
79As 80As
ρ T9 λpnQRPA(β++EC) λIPM03(β++EC) [46] λpnQRPA(β++EC) λIPM03(β++EC) [46]
103 3 3.04 × 10−12 9.73 × 10−12 1.48 × 10−12 4.94 × 10−09
10 6.87 × 10−04 9.94 × 10−04 2.03 × 10−03 3.96 × 10−03
30 1.33 × 10+02 2.23 × 10+01 2.74 × 10+02 4.01 × 10+01
107 3 1.56 × 10−10 5.06 × 10−10 7.66 × 10−11 2.56 × 10−07
10 8.63 × 10−04 1.25 × 10−03 2.55 × 10−03 4.97 × 10−03
30 1.34 × 10+02 2.25 × 10+01 2.77 × 10+02 4.04 × 10+01
1011 3 3.04 × 10+04 8.00 × 10+03 5.46 × 10+04 1.06 × 10+04
10 5.25 × 10+04 8.20 × 10+03 1.51 × 10+05 1.07 × 10+04
30 2.56 × 10+05 1.58 × 10+04 5.27 × 10+05 2.38 × 10+04
Table 5. Same as table 5 but for sum of (β + PC) rates.
67As 68As 69As
ρ T9 λpnQRPA)(β+PC) λIPM03(β+PC) [46] λpnQRPA(β+PC) λIPM03(β+PC) [46] λpnQRPA(β+PC) λIPM03(β+PC) [46]
103 3 4.29 × 10−20 8.24 × 10−17 1.01 × 10−14 1.60 × 10−09 6.82 × 10−15 4.18 × 10−12
10 2.33 × 10−06 2.88 × 10−05 2.09 × 10−04 1.62 × 10−04 8.18 × 10−05 1.88 × 10−04
30 5.90 × 10+00 2.54 × 10+00 2.82 × 10+01 8.34 × 10+00 1.47 × 10+01 5.46 × 10+00
107 3 8.26 × 10−22 1.61 × 10−18 1.94 × 10−16 3.12 × 10−11 1.31 × 10−16 8.17 × 10−14
10 1.86 × 10−06 2.30 × 10−05 1.67 × 10−04 1.30 × 10−04 6.52 × 10−05 1.50 × 10−04
30 5.86 × 10+00 2.51 × 10+00 2.82 × 10+01 8.34 × 10+00 1.46 × 10+01 5.42 × 10+00
1011 3 2.75 × 10−60 5.94 × 10−57 6.47 × 10−55 1.15 × 10−49 4.38 × 10−55 3.01 × 10−52
10 2.28 × 10−18 2.94 × 10−17 2.04 × 10−16 1.67 × 10−16 7.98 × 10−17 1.93 × 10−16
30 8.04 × 10−04 3.52 × 10−04 3.87 × 10−03 1.19 × 10−03 2.00 × 10−03 7.62 × 10−04
70As 71As 72As
ρ T9 λpnQRPA(β+PC) λIPM03(β+PC) [46] λpnQRPA(β+PC) λIPM03(β+PC) [46] λpnQRPA(β+PC) λIPM03(β+PC) [46]
103 3 2.72 × 10−11 1.88 × 10−07 7.23 × 10−12 1.45 × 10−08 1.79 × 10−08 9.54 × 10−07
10 2.10 × 10−03 5.36 × 10−04 3.69 × 10−04 1.97 × 10−03 6.59 × 10−03 1.25 × 10−03
30 8.20 × 10+01 1.32 × 10+01 2.10 × 10+01 8.26 × 10+00 8.85 × 10+01 1.23 × 10+01
107 3 5.24 × 10−13 3.68 × 10−09 1.39 × 10−13 2.83 × 10−10 3.75 × 10−10 1.76 × 10−07
10 1.67 × 10−03 4.29 × 10−04 2.94 × 10−04 1.58 × 10−03 5.25 × 10−03 1.01 × 10−03
30 8.13 × 10+01 1.30 × 10+01 2.08 × 10+01 8.18 × 10+00 8.77 × 10+01 1.21 × 10+01
1011 3 1.74 × 10−51 1.35 × 10−47 4.64 × 10−52 1.04 × 10−48 3.34 × 10−48 4.36 × 10−47
10 2.05 × 10−15 5.52 × 10−16 3.61 × 10−16 2.04 × 10−15 6.52 × 10−15 1.80 × 10−15
30 1.12 × 10−02 1.85 × 10−03 2.86 × 10−03 1.15 × 10−03 1.21 × 10−02 1.72 × 10−03
73As 74As 75As
ρ T9 λpnQRPA(β+PC) λIPM03(β+PC) [46] λpnQRPA(β+PC) λIPM03(β+PC) [46] λpnQRPA(β+PC) λIPM03(β+PC) [46]
103 3 7.06 × 10−09 3.81 × 10−06 1.88 × 10−06 4.69 × 10−05 1.45 × 10−06 5.78 × 10−06
10 1.92 × 10−3 8.36 × 10−03 2.79 × 10−02 3.32 × 10−03 6.10 × 10−03 1.20 × 10−02
30 4.71 × 10+01 1.03 × 10+01 2.11 × 10+02 1.46 × 10+01 6.87 × 10+01 1.38 × 10+01
107 3 1.63 × 10−10 7.44 × 10−08 9.24 × 10−08 2.71 × 10−05 8.63 × 10−08 6.75 × 10−07
10 1.54 × 10−03 6.68 × 10−03 2.24 × 10−02 2.83 × 10−03 4.90 × 10−03 9.70 × 10−03
30 4.67 × 10+01 1.02 × 10+02 2.09 × 10+02 1.45 × 10+01 6.82 × 10+01 1.37 × 10+01
1011 3 6.49 × 10−49 2.75 × 10−46 5.53 × 10−45 2.57 × 10−46 3.24 × 10−45 3.18 × 10−46
10 1.90 × 10−15 8.64 × 10−15 3.51 × 10−14 2.16 × 10−14 7.08 × 10−15 1.57 × 10−14
30 6.43 × 10−03 1.43 × 10−03 2.89 × 10−02 2.09 × 10−03 9.40 × 10−03 1.92 × 10−03
76As 77As 78As
ρ T9 λpnQRPA(β+PC) λIPM03(β+PC) [46] λpnQRPA(β+PC) λIPM03(β+PC) [46] λpnQRPA(β+PC) λIPM03(β+PC) [46]
103 3 6.76 × 10−05 2.01 × 10−03 4.30 × 10−05 3.85 × 10−04 2.88 × 10−03 2.15 × 10−02
10 6.27 × 10−02 1.26 × 10−02 1.52 × 10−02 3.98 × 10−02 1.80 × 10−01 6.29 × 10−02
30 2.28 × 10+02 1.94 × 10+01 9.10 × 10+01 1.79 × 10+01 3.35 × 10+02 2.55 × 10+01
107 3 1.61 × 10−05 6.35 × 10+02 1.78 × 10−05 2.00 × 10−04 1.90 × 10−03 1.92 × 10−02
10 5.16 × 10−02 1.15 × 10−02 1.26 × 10−02 3.42 × 10−02 1.55 × 10−01 5.98 × 10−02
30 2.26 × 10+02 1.92 × 10+01 9.02 × 10+01 1.78 × 10+01 3.33 × 10+02 2.53 × 10+01
1011 3 3.90 × 10−42 1.37 × 10−45 2.78 × 10−42 1.91 × 10−45 2.78 × 10−39 3.95 × 10−45
10 1.76 × 10−13 3.63 × 10−13 4.12 × 10−14 2.13 × 10−13 1.83 × 10−12 4.84 × 10−12
30 3.13 × 10−02 3.05 × 10−03 1.25 × 10−02 2.52 × 10−03 4.62 × 10−02 4.82 × 10−03
79As 80As
ρ T9 λpnQRPA(β+PC) λIPM03(β+PC) [46] λpnQRPA(β+PC) λIPM03(β+PC) [46]
103 3 1.11 × 10−03 1.17 × 10−02 1.40 × 10−02 1.14 × 10−01
10 4.03 × 10−02 1.73 × 10−01 4.15 × 10−01 2.76 × 10−01
30 1.18 × 10+02 2.34 × 10+01 3.67 × 10+02 3.54 × 10+01
107 3 7.54 × 10−04 9.27 × 10−03 1.14 × 10−02 1.05 × 10−01
10 3.53 × 10−02 1.62 × 10−01 3.75 × 10−01 2.67 × 10−01
30 1.17 × 10+02 2.32 × 10+01 3.64 × 10+02 3.52 × 10+01
1011 3 1.29 × 10−39 5.87 × 10−45 3.54 × 10−37 9.91 × 10−45
10 3.96 × 10−13 4.12 × 10−12 1.31 × 10−11 5.16 × 10−11
30 1.62 × 10−02 3.41 × 10−03 5.11 × 10−02 9.65 × 10−03

4. Conclusion

The β-decay properties were analyzed within the context of the pn-QPRA approach. It was found that the computed half-lives were within a factor of 10 of the observed data, and the computed GT distributions agreed with the measured data rather well. The predicted log ft values were compared with observed and previously computed data. The present prediction shows a decent agreement with the measured data. The stellar weak interaction rates for As isotopes were computed utilizing a complete microscopic framework, excluding the Brink–Axel hypothesis from the computation of excited state GT distributions. The model-based weak rates exceed the previous predictions (shell model) by a factor of 22. The defined stellar rates might be beneficial for r-process nucleosynthesis predictions and simulations of late-stage star evolution.

Acknowledgments

The authors extend their appreciation to Taif University, Saudi Arabia, for supporting this work through project number (TUDSPP-2024-33). J-U Nabi would like to acknowledge financial support of the Higher Education Commission Pakistan under Grant No. 20-15394/NRPU/R&D/HEC/2021.

Funding

This research was funded by Taif University, Saudi Arabia, Project No. (TU-DSPP-2024-33).

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

References

1
Nomura K 2022 Simultaneous description of β decay and low-lying structure of neutron-rich even- and odd-mass Rh and Pd nuclei Phys. Rev. C 106 064304
2
Usman S, Mushtaq A 2023 Magnetorotational instability in dense electron–positron–ion plasmas Sci. Rep. 13 15315
3
Burbidge E M 1957 Synthesis of the elements in stars Rev. Mod. Phys. 29 547
4
Woosley S E 1994 The r-process and neutrino-heated supernova ejecta Astrophys. J. 433 229
5
Nabi J-U 2024 Investigation of nuclear structure and β-decay properties of As isotopes Chin. J. Phys. 92 22
6
Hoff P, Fogelberg B 1981 Properties of strongly neutron-rich isotopes of germanium and arsenic Nucl. Phys. A 368 210
7
Mazzocchi C 2013 New half-life measurements of the most neutron-rich arsenic and germanium isotopes Phys. Rev. C 87 034315
8
Iachello F 1980 The interacting boson–fermion model Nucl. Phys. A 347 51
9
Álvarez-Rodríguez R 2004 Deformed quasiparticle random phase approximation formalism for single-and two-neutrino double β decay Phys. Rev. C 70 064309
10
Minato F, Marketin T, Paar N 2021 β-delayed neutron-emission and fission calculations within relativistic quasiparticle random-phase approximation and a statistical model Phys. Rev. C 104 044321
11
Kumar A 2020 Second-forbidden nonunique β-decays of 24Na and 36Cl assessed by the nuclear shell model Phys. Rev. C 101 064304
12
Irgaziev B F 2021 Analysis of β+ decay of 13N nucleus using a modified one-particle approach Can. J. Phys. 99 176
13
Irgaziev B F 2021 Application of ANCs for calculation of β+ decay of 17F nucleus Nucl. Phys. A 1021 122422
14
Brant S, Yoshida N, Zuffi L 2004 β decay of odd-A As to Ge isotopes in the interacting boson–fermion model Phys. Rev. C 70 054301
15
Sarriguren P 2015 β-decay properties of neutron-rich Ge, Se, Kr, Sr, Ru, and Pd isotopes from deformed quasiparticle random-phase approximation Phys. Rev. C 91 044304
16
Chen D Z, Fang D L, Bai C L 2021 Impact of finite-range tensor terms in the Gogny force on the β-decay of magic nuclei Nucl. Sci. Tech. 32 74
17
Bai C L 2022 Impact of finite-range tensor terms in the Gogny force on the β-decay of magic nuclei Chin. Phys. C 46 114104
18
Minato F, Bai C L 2013 Impact of tensor force on β-decay of magic and semimagic nuclei Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 122501
19
Wang Y Z 2023 A novel power-combination method using a time-reversal pulse-compression technique Chin. Phys. C 47 084101
20
Shehzadi R, Nabi J-U, Farooq F 2023 Beta decay and electron capture rates of manganese isotopes in astrophysical environments New Astron. 98 101937
21
Nabi J-U, Böyükata M 2016 β-decay half-lives and nuclear structure of exotic proton-rich waiting point nuclei under rp-process conditions Nucl. Phys. A 947 182
22
Klapdor-Kleingrothaus H V, Metzinger J, Oda T 1984 β-decay half-lives of neutron-rich nuclei At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 31 81
23
Staudt A 1990 Second-generation microscopic predictions of β-decay half-lives of neutron-rich nuclei At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 44 79
24
Hirsch M 1993 Microscopic predictions of β+/EC-decay half-lives At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 53 165
25
Fuller G M, Fowler W A, Newman M J 1982 Stellar weak interaction rates for intermediate-mass nuclei. II A = 21 to A = 60 Astrophys. J 252 715
26
Nabi J-U, Kabir A, Bayram T 2024 Re-analysis of the Gamow–Teller distributions for N = Z nuclei, 24Mg, 28Si, and 32S Chin. J. Phys. 87 797
27
Nabi J-U 2021 The nuclear ground-state properties and stellar electron emission rates of 76Fe, 78Ni, 80Zn, 126Ru, 128Pd and 130Cd using RMF and pn-QRPA models Nucl. Phys. A 1015 122278
28
Kabir A 2024 Re-analysis of temperature dependent neutron capture rates and stellar β-decay rates of 95–98Mo Chin. Phys. C 48 094101
29
Nilsson S G 1955 Binding states of individual nucleons in strongly deformed nuclei Mat. Fys. Medd. Dan. Vid. Selsk. 29 16
30
Ragnarsson I, Sheline R K 1984 Systematics of nuclear deformations Phys. Scr. 29 385
31
Kondev F G 2021 The NUBASE2020 evaluation of nuclear physics properties Chin. Phys. C 45 030001
32
Ha E, Cheoun M K, Sagawa H 2022 Tensor force effect on pairing correlations for the Gamow–Teller transition in 42Ca, 46Ti, and 18O Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 4 043D01
33
Möller P, Sierk A J, Ichikawa T, Sagawa H 2016 Nuclear ground-state masses and deformations: FRDM(2012) At. Data Nucl. Data Tables. 109 204
34
Homma H 1996 Systematic study of nuclear β-decay Phys. Rev. C 54 2972
35
Muto K 1992 Proton-neutron quasiparticle RPA with separable Gamow–Teller forces Z. Phys. A Hadrons Nucl. 341 407
36
Hardy J C, Towner I S 2009 Superallowed 0+- 0+ nuclear β decays: a new survey with precision tests of the conserved vector current hypothesis and the standard model Phys. Rev. C 79 055502
37
Nakamura K 2010 Particle Data Group structure functions J. Phys. G, Nucl. Part. Phys. 37 075021
38
Gove N B, Martin M J 1971 Log-f tables for beta decay At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 10 205
39
Nabi J-U, Klapdor-Kleingrothaus H V 2004 Microscopic calculations of stellar weak interaction rates and energy losses for fp-and fpg-shell nuclei At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 88 237
40
Nabi J-U, Klapdor-Kleingrothaus H V 1999 Weak interaction rates of sd-shell nuclei in stellar environment calculated in the proton-neutron quasiparticle random phase approximation At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 71 149
41
Muszynski S, Mark S K 1970 The decay of 69As Nucl. Phys. A 142 459
42
Yan L 2002 A decay study of 70As Appl. Radiat. Isot. 57 399
43
Brookhaven National Nuclear Data Center, http://www.nndc.bnl.gov.
44
Nomura K 2022 β-decay and evolution of low-lying structure in Ge and As nuclei Phys. Rev. C 105 044306
45
Ikeda K 1964 Collective excitation of unlike pair states in heavier nuclei Prog. Theor. Phys. 31 434 451
46
Pruet J, Fuller G M 2003 Estimates of stellar weak interaction rates for nuclei in the mass range A = 65–80 Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 149 189

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

© 2024 Institute of Theoretical Physics CAS, Chinese Physical Society and IOP Publishing. All rights, including for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies, are reserved.
This article is available under the terms of the IOP-Standard License.
PDF(421 KB)

27

Accesses

0

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/