CPC(HEP & NP), 2009, 33(X): 1—7 Chinese Physics C Vol. 33, No. X, Xxx, 2009

Mass differences and neutron pairing in Ca, Sn and Pb isotopes

B. S. Ishkhanov,1,2 S. V. Sidorov,1 T. Yu. Tretyakova,2;1) E. V. Vladimirova2

1 Faculty of Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow 119991, Russia 2Skobeltzyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow 119991, Russia

Abstract Various estimates of the even-odd effect of the mass shell of atomic nuclei are considered. Based on the experimental mass values of the Ca, Sn, and Pb isotopes, the dependence of the energy gap on the neutron number is traced and the relationship of this characteristic to the properties of external neutron subshells is shown. In nuclei with closed proton shells, effects directly related to neutron pairing and effects of nucleon shells are discussed. Key words nucleon interaction, models of atomic nuclei, nucleon pairing in atomic nuclei PACS 21.10.Dr, 21.30.Fe, 29.87.+g

1 Introduction ual interaction — an effective short-range interaction, which leads to an increase of the binding energy of a pair of nucleons when summation of their spins gives The creation of the shell model of the atomic nu- the total moment J = 0. The pairing of identical nu- cleus [1, 2] is one of the most significant achievements cleons makes it possible to explain many experimental of theoretical nuclear physics. The first attempts at facts, including the spin J P = 0+ of all even-even nu- its development were based on the model of atomic clei and the enhanced stability of even-even isotopes electron shells. The prospects for this approach were [3–5]. not that obvious, since there is a significant difference between the electrons in the atom and the nucleons in 2 Even-odd staggering and nucleon the atomic nucleus. In the case of an atom, the elec- pairing trons are in the strong Coulomb field of the atomic nucleus, and the interactions of electrons with one The increasing of stability of even-even nuclei another are a correction to the total potential (the leads to the stratification of the mass surface on three “screening” of the nuclear field by the electrons is arXiv:1705.08329v2 [nucl-th] 30 Jul 2017 components: one for even-even nuclei, one for odd- very important). In the case of an atomic nucleus, odd nuclei and one intermediate for nuclei with odd the total self-consistent field is the result of nucleon- mass number A. A systematic study of the binding nucleon interactions and effectively takes its proper- energies of a nucleus B(A) shows that for even-even ties into account. Accordingly, the total atomic nu- nuclei the following rule is fulfilled: cleus potential changes with transitions from isotope 1 to isotope. B(A) > [B(A+1)+B(A−1)]. (1) For a correct description of the properties of 2 atomic nuclei, in addition to changing the mean-field The observed even-odd mass staggering (EOS) has potential it is also necessary to take into account the been extensively explored in the literature [6–10]. residual interaction. This, in spite of its small value, The EOS effect is generally associated with the pair- is crucial in determining the specific properties of the ing gap ∆, as suggested by BCS theory. To estimate system of nucleons. In the first approximation, the its value various more or less averaged equations are so-called pairing forces are considered as the resid- used: three-, four- or five-point [4, 11–14] formulas

1) E-mail: [email protected] c 2017 Chinese Physical Society and the Institute of High Energy Physics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Modern Physics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and IOP Publishing Ltd c 2009 Chinese Physical Society and the Institute of High Energy Physics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Modern Physics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and IOP Publishing Ltd No. X 2

(so-called indicators): even-even nucleus and the doubled neutron separa- tion energy S (Z,N − 1) from the neighboring odd (−1)N n ∆(3)(N) = [S (N)−S (N +1)], (2) nucleus (N −1,Z) [26]: n 2 n n

N ∆nn(N) = S2n(N)−2Sn(N −1) = (4) (−1) ∆n (N) = [−Sn(N +1)+2Sn(N)−Sn(N −1)], 4 = Sn(N)−Sn(N −1) = (5) (3) = 2∆(3)(N −1), (5) 1 (4) (4) n ∆n (N) = 2 [∆n (N)+∆n (N +1)] = (−1)N where S2n(N) = B(N) − B(N − 2). This definition = [3Sn(N +1)−3Sn(N)+ (4) 8 considers the nucleus as a core with a pair of external +S (N −1)−S (N +2)], n n “valence” nucleons, and does not take into account where Sn(N) = B(N)−B(N −1) is the neutron sepa- how the mean-field potential changes when “valence” ration energy of a nucleus (N,Z). In the formulas (2 nucleons are added or removed.

- 4) for neutron EOS, the proton number Z is fixed. It is known that the ∆nn(N) dependence for even- Similar formulas (here and below) for protons can even nuclei is much smoother, and it produces an EOS be obtained by fixing the neutron number N and re- estimate lower than that given by other formulas. placing N by Z. It is seen from the formulas above Also, unlike the others, this characteristic is dimin- that the expression (3) is also an averaging between ished for closed-shell nuclei, which corresponds to the (3) (3) ∆n (N) and ∆n (N −1). common expectation that the pairing at shell closure The relations (2) and (3) were originally obtained should decrease in connection with the level density in order to get an analytic dependence of EOS on A reduction. It can be expected that ∆nn(N) includes to introduce it as an additional pairing term to the the mean field contributions to the least extent, but it semi-empirical Bethe-Weizs¨acker mass surface for- is apparently impossible to completely exclude their (3) mula. From this point of view, the values of ∆n influence [8, 10]. In Ref. [20] it was noted that, as

fluctuate much more strongly depending on A, but ∆nn(N) includes the second differences of the bind- the result of their approximation differs slightly from ing energies, its value may be non-zero even without (4) the results for ∆n [4]. So, the four-point formula EOS. (3) became the basis for describing the EOS effect, and consequently for describing the pairing effect, for 3 Seniority model a long time. In some modern calculations even more smoothing formulas are used, taking into account five With the pairing phenomena taken into account, [12, 13, 15] or six experimental binding energies of iso- the A-nucleon system Hamiltonian is: topes [11]. An increase of the number of isotopes does ˆ ˆ ˆ not significantly affect the EOS calculation result, but H = H0 +Hpair, (6) ˆ the expansion of the range of experimental data in the where H0 is the intrinsic singe-particle Hamiltonian, region far from stability can lead to the usage of ex- determined by the nucleus mean-field, and the resid- perimental data with significant errors. Modern mass ual interaction corresponds to the monopole pairing: formulae use more complicated pair approximations Hˆ = −GPˆ†P.ˆ (7) depending not only on power of A but also on isospin pair relations [17, 18]. The relationship between differ- Here G is the pairing strength parameter, and Pˆ† ent variants of the EOS estimation, as well as various and Pˆ denote the pair creation and annihilation op- (4) variants of the ∆ (A) approximation for protons and erators. A rough experimental estimate gives Gn = neutrons, are considered in Refs. [10, 19–21]. 25/A MeV for neutrons and Gp = 17/A MeV for pro- Many studies are devoted to the evaluation of tons [3]. both the direct nucleon pairing contribution to the The seniority model [27, 28] is one of the simplest EOS and the contributions of other microscopic ef- models. It describes the filling of a shell with the fects [6, 8, 22–25]. It is shown [8, 23] that the best total angular momentum j over a closed core. Fol- estimation for identical nucleons pairing in the even lowing Ref. [8], let us consider n nucleons moving in N nucleus is the three-point indicator (2) for neigh- a 2Ω-fold degenerated shell (2Ω = 2j+1), described by (3) bor odd neutron number ∆n (N+1). This conclusion the Hamiltonian in Eq. (7). The energy eigenvalues corresponds to the direct determination of the two- in the seniority model can be expressed in terms of neutron pairing ∆nn(N) as the difference between the nucleon number n and seniority ν (the number of un- two-neutron separation energy S2n(Z,N) from the paired nucleons (quasiparticles) in the configuration No. X 3 considered): 25 d3/2 f7/2 p3/2 p1/2 a) 1 E(n,ν) = − G(n−ν)(2Ω−ν −n+2). (8) S 4 20 p

The nuclear ground state has seniority ν = 0 for even ) 15 V nucleon number n (all nucleons are paired), and ν = 1 e M ( for odd number n. The value of EOS according to the S 10 formula for the three-point indicator (2) is: 5 ( Sn 1 GΩ+ 1 G for even n, ∆(3)(n) = 2 2 (9) τ 1 0 N 2 GΩ for odd n. 15 20 25 30 35 40

The index τ = n,p denotes the nucleon type. Since 40 d3/2 f7/2 p p f b) this result depends only on whether the number of 3/2 1/2 5/2 particles n is even or odd and does not depend on the 30 absolute value of n, the average four- and five-point ) indicators (3) and (4) in the seniority model are the V e M ( same: 20 n n S 1 1 ∆5 (n) = ∆4 (n) = GΩ+ G, for all n. (10) τ τ 2 4 10

The pairing energy direct estimation ∆ττ (5) for 0 N an even neutron number will be smaller than the dou- 15 20 25 30 35 40 bled three-point indicator 2∆(3): τ Fig. 1. Neutron Sn(N), proton Sp(N) (a) and ( two-neutron S2n(N) (b) separation energies in GΩ for even n, Ca isotopes. Data from Ref. [30]. ∆ττ (N) = (11) GΩ+G for odd n. The values Sn(N) for even and odd N are divided In this case the pairing value is equal to the doubled into two groups lying well on two straight parallel (3) EOS effect ∆ττ (n) = 2∆τ (n−1) and does not depend lines. Sharp leaps between groups of Sn values for on the absolute value of n. N = 20, 28, 32 correspond to subshell transitions. Since the distance between single-particle levels is 4 Nucleon separation energy large in light nuclei, a consistent filling of the sub- shells 1d3/2 − 1f7/2 − 2p3/2 in Ca isotopes is traced well. In the simplest case of two neutrons pairing over Fig. 1(a) also gives the proton separation energy the closed core, the pairing energy ∆ (N) (5) corre- nn S (N). Despite the fact that the number of protons sponds to the doubled EOS effect ∆(3)(N −1). Here- p n remains constant at Z = 20, this dependence has a after we consider the corresponding doubled indica- saw-tooth shape as well. Although it is not so pro- tors: nounced as that for Sn(N), it nevertheless reflects the influence of the neutron pairing on the total mean- ∆(3)(N) = 2∆(3)(N), (12) nn n field potential changes. (4) (4) ∆nn(N) = 2∆n (N), (13) The measured two-neutron separation energy (5) (5) ∆nn(N) = 2∆n (N). (14) S2n(N) (see Fig. 1(b) does not show the effect of neu- tron pairing, because only even N or odd N isotopes Since relations (12 - 14) depend on the nucleon are used for its calculation. separation energies, let us consider the neutron sep- In Refs. [28, 29] it was shown that in seniority aration energy as a function of the neutron number model the energy of n valence nucleons in the field of N in isotopes Z = Const. In Fig. 1(a), the measured the closed core B(jn) can be expressed as neutron separation energy Sn in Ca isotopes (Z = 20) n n(n−1) B(j ) = Bcore(n = 0)+nεj + α− is plotted. The dependence Sn shows a saw-tooth 2 n (15) 1 h 1−(−1) i form, as a consequence of the pairing effect. − 2 n− 2 β No. X 4

So the single nucleon separation energy 8 ∆nn a) 7 (3) S (N) = B(jn)−B(jn−1) = ∆nn n (16) 6 1+(−1)n (4) = εj +(n−1)α+ 2 β ) ∆nn V 5 e M ( 4 includes the energy εj , and depends on the kinetic en- n n ergy of the nucleon on the j shell and on the energy ∆ 3 of interaction of an external nucleon with the core. 2 The third term, proportional to β, corresponds to to 1 the pairing effect, and the second one, proportional to 0 N α, provides a common gradient of the curve Sn(N). 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 8 The values of the coefficients α and β can be de- ∆nn b) termined from the two-body matrix elements of “va- 7 (3) ∆ lence” nucleon interactions, so the pairing interaction nn 6 (4)

) ∆ not only determines the saw-tooth shape of Sn(N), nn V 5 e (5)

but makes a contribution to the self-consistent mean M

( ∆ 4 nn n

field changes too. Sharp leaps between groups of Sn n values for N = 20, 28, 32 are determined by the dif- ∆ 3 ference εj1 −εj2 in the transition between subshells j1 2 and j2. 1 0 N 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 5 Identical nucleon pairing (i) Fig. 2. Neutron pairing energy indicators ∆nn (12 - 14) in Ca isotopes for N = 16 − 38 (a) Due to the total gradient of the Sn(N) depen- and for even N (b). Data from Ref. [30]. dence in one subshell, the pairing energy ∆nn, ob- tained from (5), is always less than the result obtained from the three-point formula (2) for even N: It of interest is to consider the behavior of the (3) difference between ∆nn and ∆nn, formally coinciding (3) with the pairing strength parameter G in the simplest ∆nn < ∆nn, seniority model (9): which is consistent with the seniority model (9, 11). N (3)
δe(N) = (−1) ∆nn −∆nn(N) . In Fig. 2, values of pairing energy indicators ∆nn (3) (4) from (5), ∆nn (2) and ∆nn (3) in the Ca isotopes are At the same time, the definitions (2, 5) imply plotted. All calculations were made on the base of measured nuclear masses from Ref. [30]. If even and δe(N) = Sn(N −1)−Sn(N +1). odd N are considered together one can clearly see (3) As the behavior of the Sn(N) dependence (Fig. 1(a)) that ∆nn and ∆nn values coincide accurarely on the (4) shows, the value δe(N) excludes the pairing effect and N = 1 shift (Fig. 2(a)), and the ∆nn values are their can be regarded as a correction associated with the average. The leap in Sn(N) dependence due to the core polarization and/or the contribution of the three- closure of the 1d2s subshell and the start of the f7/2 subshell filling occurs at N = 20 and N + 1 = 21. As body interaction [31]. (3) a result the three-point pairing energy indicator ∆nn

(2) has a sharp leap even at N = 20, but for ∆nn (5) 6 Results for semimagic nuclei the corresponding change is at odd N +1 = 21. That (3) is why for even-even nuclei the three-point indicator In Fig. 3 the dependencies ∆nn, ∆nn and δe in (3) ∆nn has significant fluctuations near the magic num- even-even Ca isotopes are plotted. In Fig. 3(a), in (3) bers, while the dependence of ∆nn(N) has a smoother addition to ∆ , the experimental values of the first behavior (see Fig. 2(b)). The values of the averaged excited states J π = 2+ are also given. In the 40Ca (4) (5) + indicators ∆nn and ∆nn are almost the same, but it case, which is typical for doubly magic nuclei, the 2 should be noted that an increase in the number of state is not always the first excited state, which is as- points used to calculate the averaged characteristics sociated with increasing of the rigidity and spherical narrows the range of isotopes under consideration. symmetry of nuclei with filled shells [4]. No. X 5

(3) 8 d5/2 f p case the indicators ∆nn and ∆nn (and respectively 7/2 3/2 (3) a) ∆ (4) 7 nn their averaging four- and five-point indicators ∆nn E*(2+) and ∆(5)) reflect the neutron pairing effect most accu- 6 nn (3) ) /2 rately. The values ∆nn(N) more clearly demonstrate ∆nn V 5 e the dependence of the pairing energy on j quantum M ( ) n 3 4 ( n number. The ratio between the values for different ∆ 3 subshells corresponds to the ratio of the number of projections for the corresponding j [36]: 2

1 ∆ ∆ (22) ∆ (30) ∆ (36) nn = nn ≈ nn ≈ nn ≈ 0.35 0 N 16 20 24 28 32 36 2j +1 8 4 6

8 ∆ nn b) 20Ca A value of 0.35 agrees well with the accepted approx- 7 δe 25/A imation of the neutron pairing strength parameter 6 Gn ∼ 25/A MeV (denoted in Fig. 3, 4 by a blue dashed

) 5 line). V e (3)

M The behavior of indicators ∆ and δe for semi- ( 4 nn

δe magic isotopes Sn and Pb with Z = 50,82 have the 3 same features. Figure 4 (a, b) shows the dependen- 2 (3) + cies of ∆nn and Ex(2 ) on the neutron number N in 1 tin isotopes. For clarity, the dotted line also plots the (3) (3) 0 N value ∆n = ∆nn/2, which corresponds with good 16 20 24 28 32 36 + accuracy to the excitation energy Ex(2 ) for most Fig. 3. Neutron pairing energies in Ca even- isotopes in the chain. even isotopes. (a) The solid line corresponds (3) to the three-point indicator ∆nn, and circles mark the experimental data E (2+)[40], [41]. 7 x 1 d g s d f (3) (3) (3) 5/2 7/2 1/2 3/2 h11/2 7/2 ∆ For comparison, the values ∆ = ∆ /2 are nn n nn 6 indicated by the dashed line. (b) The values E*(2+) (3) ∆nn (dashed line) and δe (solid line) are plot- ) 5 ∆ /2 V nn ted. For comparison, the values δe(N) = 25/A e M

( 4 ) n 3

(MeV) are indicated by the dashed blue line. ( n a) 3

The spectroscopy of Ca isotopes was considered 2 in detail in Ref. [32]. The low-energy spectra of odd 1 Ca isotopes and the single-particle structure demon- 0 N strate the isolation of the subshell f7/2 with respect to 48 52 56 60 64 68 72 76 80 84 88 40 7 ∆ nn the closed core 20Ca, leading to a pronounced sequen- 50Sn δe tial filling of neutron subshells. In Fig. 3 the vertical 6 25/A dashed lines denoting the subshells filling correspond ) 5 (3) + V strictly to the maxima in the ∆nn, δe and Ex(2 ) de- e b) M pendencies on the neutron number in the Ca isotopes. ( 4 δe Thus, all three characteristics strongly correlate with 3 each other. 2 As mentioned above, the ∆nn(N) value for even nuclei has a more smoothed character, but, neverthe- 1 less, it is rather complicated and undergoes significant 0 N changes at the shell boundaries. One should note 48 52 56 60 64 68 72 76 80 84 88 the similarity of values of ∆(3) and ∆ (and, cor- nn nn Fig. 4. Neutron pairing energies in even-even respondingly, small δe value) for isotopes 42,44,46Ca. isotopes of tin Sn (Z = 50). For definitions see An approximation which considers the closed core Fig. 3. 40 20Ca with f7/2 shell filled consequently fits well for these isotopes [33–35] and one can assume that in this No. X 6

(3) 7 a) The same regularities can be traced in the ∆nn, h9/2 i13/2 p3/2 f5/2 p g9/2 1/2 ∆ and δe dependencies for lead isotopes (Fig. 5 6 nn (3) (3) a, b). The behavior of ∆nn and ∆nn is almost the ∆nn ) 5 same, which leads to δe ≈ Const for most Pb iso-

V * +

e E (2 )

M (3) topes. A general decrease in the pairing effect ∆nn ( 4 )

n /2 3 ∆ ( n nn can be associated with the transition from filling the 3 high-momentum subshell group (i11/2,p3/2) to states 2 with a smaller value of j, up to j = 1/2 for N = 124. 1 Of course the behavior of the characteristics under consideration for neutron-rich isotopes with N > 132 0 N 96 100 104 108 112 116 120 124 128 132 136 is very interesting. For example, in Ref. [31] it was 7 b) shown that negative values of δe may indicate a sharp 82Pb change in the type of deformation of the nucleus dur- 6 ∆ nn ing the transition from one isotope to another. How-

) 5 δe

V ever, the error in determining the neutron separation

e 25/A M

( 4 energies for these isotopes amounts to tens of per- δe centages and it is somewhat premature to make un- 3 ambiguous conclusions about the magnitude of the 2 characteristics based on the difference of separation

1 energies Sn.

0 N 96 100 104 108 112 116 120 124 128 132 136 Summary Fig. 5. Neutron pairing energies in even-even isotopes of lead Pb (Z = 82). For definitions see Fig. 3. The main features of various atomic nucleus char- acteristics based on the mass differences, the neutron From the single-particle structure point of view, separation energy and various options for calculating the consequential filling of subshells does not exist the mass-surface EOS effect have been considered in in tin isotopes. Occupations of single-particle or- this paper. For semi-magic isotopes with Z = 20,50, bitals rise rather smoothly with neutron number from and 82, for example, the complex nature of the even-

N = 50 to N = 80 [37]. Consequently, the Sn(N) odd effect, which includes both the nucleon pairing and S2n(N) dependencies have a smoothed varia- and other mean-field effects such as shell and sub- tion without significant gaps associated with transi- shell filling or symmetry effects, has been shown. The (3) tions between the subshells. In the ∆nn(N) depen- behavior of the characteristics involving the neutron dence, there is a small leap at N = 66, indicating separation energies from two neighboring isotopes, (3) the presence of a gap between the (d5/2,g7/2) and ∆nn and ∆nn, strongly depends on the properties of

(s1/2,d3/2,h11/2) subshell groups. One should also the external nucleons and reflects not only the nu- note the proximity of the values and the explicit cor- cleon correlations in the middle of the shell filling, (3) respondence of the form of ∆nn and ∆nn dependen- but also the closed shells and subshell formation as cies throughout the shell. Nevertheless, δe values the nucleon number goes through the magic numbers. have pronounced changes, but they are minimal for The ∆nn value for even-even nuclei has a smooth N > 70. In this region, the subshells with large values N dependence, since it involves isotopes with the of j, 1h11/2 and 2f7/2, are filled, which leads to the numbers N and N − 1 and in the case of even N characteristic spectra of the low-energy excited states does not include the leap associated with a change in in these isotopes [38]. A sharp leap in the three-point the neutron single-particle energy upon transition to (3) indicator ∆nn(N) for N = 82 values corresponds to the next subshell. The systematic underestimation of the transition to a new shell, and the decrease in the the EOS value calculated by the formula ∆nn, com- pairing effect that occurs can be related to a decrease pared with other three-, four- and five point indica- (3) (4) (5) in the number of projections j on the outer shells [39], tors (∆nn, ∆nn, ∆nn) is in accordance with the con-

16 on the subshell (d3/2,h11/2) compared to 8 on the clusions of the simplest seniority model. The smallest more isolated subshell f7/2: discrepancy between the various variants of the calcu- ∆ (76) ∆ (84) lation is observed in the middle of the subshell filling. nn ≈ nn ≈ 0.15 16 8 In this case the EOS value corresponds most closely No. X 7 to the pairing energy ∆ ≈ GΩ, and the difference form an energy gap 1-2 MeV between the ground and (3) between the ∆nn − ∆nn corresponds to the pairing first exited state in even-even nucleus spectra. strength parameter G = 25/A. In this area, far from The authors would like to thank Dr. D. Lanskoy, magic numbers, pairing is most vividly manifested. M. Stepanov and L. Imasheva for useful discussions A characteristic manifestation of the pairing effect and technical support. is the low-lying 2+ states of collective nature, which

References 21 B.S. Ishkhanov, M.E. Stepanov, T.Yu. Tretyakova, Moscow University Phys. Bull. 69 (No. 1): 1-20 (2014) 1 M.G. Mayer, Phys Rev., 75: 1969-70 (1949) 22 D. Hove, A.S. Jensen, K. Riisager, Phys. Rev. C, 88: 2 O. Haxel , H.H.D. Jensen, H.E. Suess, Phys Rev., 75: 1766 064329 (2013) (1949) 23 S. A. Changizi, C. Qi, R. Wyss, Nucl. Phys. A940: 210 3 J.M. Eisenberg, W. Greiner Nuclear Theory. V.3. Micro- (2015) scopic theory of the nucleus (Amsterdam: North Holland 24 S. A. Changizi, C. Qi, Phys. Rev. C, 91: 024305 (2015) Publ. Co., 1972) p. 277-343. 25 S.E. Agbemava, A.V. Afanasjev, D. Ray, P. Ring, Phys. 4 A. Bohr, B.R. Mottelson, Nuclear Structure, v. 1, (N.Y.: Rev. C, 89: 054320 (2014) Benjamin, 1969), p. 169-171. 26 M. A. Preston, Physics of the Nucleus (Mass.: Addison- 5 P. Ring, P. Schuck, The Nuclear Many-Body Problem, 3rd Wesley, Reading, 1962), p. 172-206 edition (Berlin: Springer, 2004), p. 217-243. 27 G. Racah, Phys. Rev. 63: 367 (1943) 6 W. Satula, J. Dobaczewski, W. Nazarewicz, Phys. Rev. 28 I. Talmi, Simple Models of Complex Nuclei. Contemp. Lett., 81: 3599 (1998) Conc. in Phys., Book 7 (New York: Harwood Acad. Publ., 7 K. Rutz, M. Bender, P.-G. Reinhard, J.A. Maruhn, Phys. 1993), p. 349-430. Lett. B 468: 1 (1999). 29 I. Talmi, Phys. Rev., 107: 326 (1956) 8 J. Dobaczewski, P. Magierski, W. Nazarewicz et al, Phys. 30 M. Wang , G. Audi , F.G. Kondev et al, Chin. Phys. C 41: Rev. C, 63: 024308 (2001) 030003 (2016) 9 M. Bender, P.-H. Heenen, P.-G. Reinhard, Rev. Mod. 31 B.A. Brown in Fifty Years of Nuclear BCS, Pairing in Fi- Phys., 75: 121 (2003) nite Systems, ed. by R.A. Broglia and V. Zelevinsky (Sin- 10 C. Qi, R. Wyss, Phys. Scr., 91: 013009 (2016) gapore: World Scientific, 2013), p. 11 A.S. Jensen, P.G. Hansen, and B. Jonson, Nucl. Phys. 32 B.S. Ishkhanov, M.E. Stepanov, T.Yu. Tretyakova, Moscow A431, 393 (1984). University Phys. Bull. 69 (No. 6): 3 (2014) 12 D.G. Madland, J.R. Nix, Nucl. Phys. A476: 1-38 (1988) 33 J.D. McCullen, B.F. Bayman, L. Zamick, Phys. Rev., 134: 13 P. M¨oller,J.R. Nix, Nucl. Phys. A536: 20-60 (1992) B515 (1964) 14 M. Bender, K. Rutz, P.-G. Reinhard, and J.A. Maruhn, 34 A. Escuderos, L. Zamick, B.F. Bayman, arXiv: nucl- Eur. Phys. Jour. A 8, 59 (2000). th/0506050v2. 15 T. Duguet, P. Bonche, P.-H. Heenen, J. Meyer, Phys. Rev. 35 L.T. Imasheva, B.S. Ishkhanov, S.V. Sidorov et al, Bull. of C, 65: 014311 (2001) RAS. Physics 80 (No. 3): 313 (2016) 16 P. M¨oller,J.R. Nix, W.D. Meyers, W.J. Swiatecki, At. Data 36 M.G. Mayer, Phys. Rev., 78: 22-23 (1950) and Nucl. Data Tabl. 59: 185 (1995) 37 V.I. Isakov, Phys. At. Nucl., 76: 828. (2013) 17 G. Royer , M. Guilbaud , A. Onillon, Nucl. Phys. A 847: 38 L.T. Imasheva, B.S. Ishkhanov, M.E. Stepanov et al, Eur. 24 (2010) Phys. Jour. WoC, 107: 04005 (2016) 18 M. Liu, N. Wang, Jour. of Phys. Conf. Ser. 420: 012057 39 B.A. Brown, Jour. of Phys: Conf. Ser., 580: 012016 (2015) (2013) 40 National Nuclear Data Center, Brookhaven, Evaluated Nu- 19 S. Halaire, J.-F. Berger, M. Girod, et al, Phys. Lett. B 531: clear Structure Data File, http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/ensdf/. 61-66 (2002) 41 Centre for Photonuclear Experiments Data, 20 W.A. Friedman, G.F. Bertsch, Eur. Phys. Jour. A 41: 109- http://cdfe.sinp.msu.ru/. 113 (2009)