Arxiv:2006.15142V2

Home , Yrast

arXiv:2006.15142v2 [nucl-th] 9 Dec 2020 129 la ci oet(S)idcdb the nu- by the from induced arises (NSM) atom moment diamagnetic Schiff a contributions with of clear leading EDM interactions the the the of to to One due completely electrons. atoms are surrounding neutral those in but screened EDMs, nuclear induce actions a enipoe o ogtm in time long a for improved been has NN otpeiemaueetaogalteprilss far. so is particles constraint the present all The among measurement precise most ulo ( the including nucleon nuclei atomic in olation ofiuain feeto 1,1] h Dso dia- of EDMs the The to sensitive alternatively closed 16]. are atoms the [15, magnetic of electron because of atoms configurations diamagnetic in suppressed 1 mrvdtebs ii nteeeto D yor- is by status EDM current The electron 14]. the [13, on magnitude limit of ders best Re- the molecule [12]. monoxide improved nucleus thorium the the diffi- of using its measurements metastability of cent the spite to to in francium owing proposed of culty is the EDM atomic on experiment the bounds an measure Recently, upper presented EDM. and 11] electron 9] [4–7]. [10, [8, atoms cesium atoms the than thallium francium of and greater measurements experimental thallium, are The cesium, factors the calcu- in enhancement many-body 100 the atomic by that demonstrated lations [3]. been electron of has param- configurations and It 2] similar [1, with atoms alkali atoms in ef- agnetic that EDM relativistic known electron the the is by of It enhanced fect greatly model. are ( EDMs standard charge-parity atomic the of beyond probes in as olation expected are atoms ∗ † . 1 [email protected] [email protected] The h emnn lcrcdpl oet EM)of (EDMs) moments dipole electric permanent The e[73] npriua the particular In [27–30]. Xe × ag-cl hl-oe acltoso ula ci mom Schiff nuclear of calculations shell-model Large-scale neatos[71] h xeietlprecision experimental The [17–19]. interactions 10 CP − 29 NN e ilto u oteeeto D utbe must EDM electron the to due violation oet.W efr ag-cl hl-oe calculations shell-model uppe large-scale experimental perform from We model standard moments. the beyond violation tts h ci oet of on moments Schiff one-particle The the states. employ we perturbatively, interaction elsi ffcieitrcin.T siaeteShffmom Schiff the estimate To interactions. effective realistic uvylweeg ula tutr.Telresaeshel of large-scale of moment The Schiff moment the structure. in nuclear discrepancy low-energy th the survey shell-mode On resolve and to calculations model. order In particle based mean-field independent in the significant of evaluation the from cm. neatos The interactions. ) h hoeia netit ntencerShffmmn sa is moment Schiff nuclear the in uncertainty theoretical The etrfrNcerSuy h nvriyo oy,731Hon 7-3-1 Tokyo, of University the Study, Nuclear for Center .INTRODUCTION I. 199 | gi osdrbyqece ntesecond the in quenched considerably is Hg d Hg | < 199 7 gaoi D sthe is EDM atomic Hg . P 4 , × P 199 T oaYanase Kota 10 , 129 -odd T g[02]and [20–26] Hg − eand Xe odnucleon- -odd 30 e Dtd eebr1,2020) 10, December (Dated: NN m Some cm. P , CP CP 199 T | inter- d -odd vi- ) ∗ e gaerdcddet h ofiuainmxn by mixing configuration the to due reduced are Hg | vi- n oiaaShimizu Noritaka and < eotdsvrlyasao[3 34]. [33, ago years several reported al ihrslso P acltos oee,fully However, of calculations calculations. (HFB) IPM Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov compa- of self-consistent still results is with coefficient isovector rable sup- the are channels whereas isotensor pressed, and isoscalar the interaction, of state cal- ground mean-field performed in They culations quasi-particle [37–39]. the and (QRPA) in (RPA) RPA account approximation into phase taken Subsequently, random were 36]. interactions [35, residual correction the spin-orbit poten- the Woods-Saxon and phenomenological tial em- the is In (IPM) with model far. ployed nu- particle so independent approximation those an mean-field studies for the early calculations on based many-body are of clei Most actions. ocag t in h uhr nerdta h soft the that inferred authors The the as of deformation so sign. quadrupole coefficient its isovector in- change residual the to the reduce of greatly effects QRPA teractions the the employed, with are interactions calculations Skyrme same the Although h pe on fthe 32]. of [31, NSMs bound the atomic upper enhance of greatly The to deformation supposed octupole is experimen- nuclei because of spite difficulties in attentions tal paid are atoms actinide and P 3]adtePS 4]suisarei htthe that in agree studies [42] PTSM the schematic The and studies, [38] adopted. PTSM were RPA interactions the quadrupole In plus nucleons. pairing collective of like of composed of (PTSM), are holes pairs bases model many-body shell neutron the pair-truncated which the and in as to protons referred active is due of cost numerical number drasti- sizable 129 a are the evade to configurations In to of truncated possible space. number cally valence vast studies, restricted the the preceding of in combinations determinants Slater linear as pressed neces- mixing. the configuration claimed of and uncertainty sity theoretical the to rise ntepeetsuyw ocnrt nthe on concentrate we study present the In ntencerselmdl aefntosaeex- are functions wave model, shell nuclear the In e[1 2.Ta ipie eso fteselmodel shell the of version simplified That 42]. [41, Xe 199 -oe acltosrva htteSchiff the that reveal calculations l-model -oeapoiaint h intermediate the to approximation e-hole 2 1 − acltoswt rsi truncation. drastic a with calculations l 199 gNM nue ythe by induced NSMs Hg 199 state. nscue ythe by caused ents fthe of gaogsvrlncermdl,we models, nuclear several among Hg te ad h euto smore is reduction the hand, other e btcet e osrit on constraints set to obstacle n onso tmceeti dipole electric atomic on bounds r gisl rsne otoesa eut [40]. results controversial presented itself Hg 198 o ukok,Tko Japan Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, go, gadaddanurnt eciethe describe to neutron a added and Hg 129 199 † eand Xe g osdrn the Considering Hg. nsof ents 225 199 P aaoi D a first was EDM atomic Ra gnce with nuclei Hg , 199 129 T -odd gncesmgtgive might nucleus Hg eand Xe P , ∼ T πNN 10% -odd CP P , T -odd 199 NN Hg πNN 129 inter- Xe 2

NSM of 129Xe is reduced roughly by one order of magni- T = 0, 1, 2 represent the isospin structures of the P , T - tude from the IPM results. (T ) odd vertex gπNN . The other side of the P , T -odd πNN In this paper, we perform large-scale shell-model interaction must be the P , T -even vertex gπNN . Those (LSSM) calculations of 129Xe and 199Hg utilizing real- couplings are contained in istic eﬀective interactions based on the G-matrix interactions. The P , T -odd πNN interaction can be treated 1 (0) F0 = gπNN gπNN , as a perturbation. As discussed in the following section, 8πMN we adopt the one-particle one-hole approximation to the 1 (1) F1 = gπNN gπNN , intermediate states, where the residual correlations are −16πMN neglected. A natural progression of the present study is 1 (2) to expand the valence space in the LSSM calculations. F2 = gπNN gπNN , (4) 8πMN

where MN denotes the nucleon mass. II. FORMULATION In the infinite pion-mass limit, the one-pion-exchange P , T -odd NN interaction is related to the contact inter- The electric dipole moment (EDM) of an atom is de- action [36, 38, 44] fined by G 1 V = η σ η σ ∇δ(r), (5) C √ 2m ab a − ba b · Z 2 N d = er , (1) e atom − i where G is the Fermi coupling constant and Xi=1 √2 where the summation runs over atomic electrons. The η = g g(0) + g(1) +2g(2) nn Gm2 πNN πNN πNN πNN atomic EDM has a non-zero value only if P and T sym- π metries are both violated in the atomic system. The √2 η = g g(0) g(1) +2g(2) same argument is applicable to the nuclear Schiff mo- pp 2 πNN πNN πNN πNN Gmπ − ment (NSM), which requires P and T violations in the √2 atomic nucleus. The NSM violates P and T symmetries η = g g(0) + g(1) 2g(2) np Gm2 πNN − πNN πNN − πNN of the atomic system through the interactions with elec- π trons. √2 η = g g(0) g(1) 2g(2) . (6) The NSM operator is defined by [43] pn Gm2 πNN − πNN − πNN − πNN π Z The exchange terms are not contained in the expres- e 2 5 2 S = r ri r ri , (2) sion (5) since nuclear wave functions used in this paper 10 i − 3 ch Xi=1 are anti-symmetrized. The contact P , T -odd NN inter- r action originated from the Weinberg operator could be where i indicates the proton coordinates with the elec- as important as the P , T -odd πNN interaction at low tric charge e, and r2 is the mean squared radius of h ich energies [45]. the charge distribution. The NSM of a spin-J state is The nuclear Hamiltonian is expressed as given by the expectation value in the largest projection

M = J. H = H0 + V, (7) The NSM can be induced by the P , T -odd NN interactions. Considering the one-pion-exchange P , T -odd where H0 denotes P , T -even NNeinteractions. Since the NN interaction, the nuclear Hamiltonian contains the P , T -odd πNN interaction V should be very weak, the following P , T -odd potential: ground state of H is expressed without the normalization as e V = VT , ψ ψ V ψ T =0X,1,2 n n 0 ψ = ψ0 + , (8) e e − E E e mπr Xn 0 en V = F τ τ σ σ ∇ , − 0 0 1 · 2 1 − 2 · r where ψ0 is the ground state of H0 and ψn denotes the Ve = F τ + τ σ σ excited| statesi of the same (J, M = J) and| i the opposite 1 1 1z 2z 1 − 2 h parity. The NSM is then calculated as e e−mπr + τ1z τ2z σ1 + σ2 ∇ , − · r ψ S ψ ψ V ψ i 0 z n n 0 e−mπr ψ Sz ψ = + c.c. τ τ σ σ ∇ E0 En V2 = F2 3τ1zτ2z 1 2 1 2 , (3) Xn e − · − · r − 2 e (T ) where r = r r is the relative coordinate of two nu- = aT gπNN g , (9) 1 − 2 πNN cleons and mπ denotes the pion mass. The subscripts TX=0 3 where c.c. denotes the complex conjugate. The numerical the Z = 82 shell gap are referred to as type I. In type results on nuclear physics are put together in the coef- II excitations, protons are excited from the core to the ficients aT , which are referred to as NSM coefficients in valence space. The core orbitals that the excited protons this paper. leave should be occupied again in the final state because the core is fully occupied in the shell-model configurations. The excitations from the core across the valence space are referred to as type III. The details of the calculation of the numerator in Eq. (9) are given in Appendix A. The energy denominators in Eq. (9) are approximated by E0 En εh εp, where εi denotes the single-particle energies− in the≈ spherical− Nilsson potential. According to Ref. [42], the uncertainty arising from this approximation is roughly estimated as 10%. In general, the intermediate states approximated by Eq. (10) do not compose the orthogonal basis. The orthogonalization is accomplished by diagonalizing the norm matrix, FIG. 1. Three types of the intermediate states defined in Eq. (10). As explained in the main text, a proton should be N ′ = ψ ′ ; JM ψ ; JM . (11) excited across at least one shell gap. n n n n

In the present calculations this procedure varies the NSM 129 199 In order to obtain wave functions of the ground states coefficients aT of Xe and Hg within a few percent. in 129Xe and 199Hg, we perform large-scale shell-model (LSSM) calculations. The wave functions of each nucleus are expressed as linear combinations of the possible configurations within a restricted model space referred to as III. RESULTS the valence space. As shown in Fig. 1, the proton valence space consists of five orbitals between magic numbers 50 129 and 82. A single-particle orbital in the spherical har- A. Xe monic oscillator potential with the spin-orbit splitting is characterized by the number of nodes n, the orbital For 129Xe, we adopt the valence space that consists of angular momentum l, and the total angular momentum the five orbitals between the magic numbers 50 and 82, j. The one-body matrix elements of the NSM operator 0g7/2,1d5/2,1d3/2,2s1/2, and0h11/2, for both proton and must vanish unless the initial and final orbitals follow neutron. The 129Xe nucleus has four protons and seven that ∆n 2, ∆l = 1, and ∆j 1. Since there are no ≤ ≤ neutron holes in the valence space and the M-scheme di- combinations that satisfy all the conditions among the mension reaches 3 109. We utilize the shell-model code five orbitals in the valence space, we are forced to con- KSHELL [46] and the× Oakforest-PACS supercomputer to sider excitations due to the P , T -odd πNN interaction perform LSSM calculations throughout this paper. V across at least one shell gap. As an effective interaction, we adopt the SN100PN in- In the present calculations, following the prescrip- teraction, which is constructed with a renormalized G- tione of Ref. [42], the intermediate states ψ are ap- | ni matrix derived from the CD-Bonn nucleon-nucleon inter- proximated by one-particle one-hole excitations from the action [47]. The single-particle energies are determined ground state. The rotational symmetry of the P , T -odd by the low-lying energy levels in 133Sb and 131Sn. The πNN interaction requires the same spin J and the pro- microscopic structure of high-spin states in 129Xe was in- jection M with the ground state. In the one-particle vestigated by LSSM calculations with the SN100PN in- one-hole approximation, the intermediate states are then teraction [48]. We briefly investigate low-spin structure expressed with the normalization constants Nn as of 129Xe, which is relevant to the accuracy of the NSM. (J) In order to examine the dependence of the 129Xe NSM † (L) ψn; JM = Nn cπpcπh ψ0; J , (10) M on the residual interaction, we employ another well- h i proven effective interaction. The SNV interaction con- where the square brackets represente the tensor products. sists of the SNBG3 interaction for the neutron-neutron An intermediate state is specified by single-particle or- part, the N82GYM interaction for the proton-proton bitals p and h coupled to a rank L. The one-particle part, and the monopole-based universal (VMU) interac- one-hole excitations are classified into three types as illus- tion for the neutron-proton part [49]. The SNV inter- trated in Fig. 1. The one-particle one-hole excited states action has been used to investigate nuclear structure of in which protons are excited from the valence space across 133−134Ba and 133,135La [50–52]. 4

TABLE II. The NSM coeﬃcients of 129Xe in units of 10−2e fm3. Our ﬁnal results are given in bold.

a0 a1 a2

IPM (mπ →∞) −9.9 −9.9 −19.8 IPM −4.6 −4.6 −9.2

LSSM (SN100PN, mπ →∞) −8.7 −8.2 −15.8

LSSM (SNV, mπ →∞) −8.6 −8.3 −16.2 LSSM (SN100PN) −3.7 −4.1 −8.0 LSSM (SNV) −3.8 −4.1 −8.1

IPM (mπ →∞) [35, 36] −11 −11 −22 IPM [38] −6 −6 −12 RPA [38] −0.8 −0.6 −0.9 PTSM [41] 0.05 −0.04 0.19 PTSM [42] 0.3 −0.1 0.4

FIG. 2. The energy spectra of 129Xe calculated with the effective interactions SN100PN and SNV. The positive and 129 negative parity states are represented in red and blue, respec- Table II summarizes the NSM coefficients aT of Xe. tively. The experimental levels (Expt.) are extracted from In early studies, Flambaum et al. applied the indepen- Ref. [53]. dent particle model (IPM) to calculating the NSM coefficients [35, 36]. They employed the Woods-Saxon potential with the spin-orbit correction as a mean field. et al. Figure 2 shows the calculated excitation energies of the Dmitriev improved the one-body potential by yrast states in comparison with experimental data [53]. adding a self-consistent mean field obtained from the + two-body Landau-Migdal interaction and the Coulomb The spin and parity J π = 1 of the ground state are 2 potential [38]. If the exchange terms in the P , T -odd correctly reproduced with both the effective interactions. NN interactions are excluded, the IPM results follow Comparing the theoretical results, the positive-parity that a = 2a = 2a [38] as can be seen in the seventh states with spins J 5 are closer to the experimen- 2 0 1 2 and eighth rows of Table II. The IPM is helpful to verify tal levels by using the≥ SN100PN interaction. Since the the validity of numerical calculations thanks to the sim- negative-parity states are overbound with the SN100PN ple relation. Moreover, IPM results are expected to be interaction, the single-particle energy of the neutron insensitive to the one-body potentials as discussed in the 0h orbital might be too low for the neutron-deficient 11/2 following paragraph. nucleus. Flambaum et al. adopted the contact P , T -odd NN interaction [35, 36], whereas the finite-range P , T -odd TABLE I. Calculated magnetic moments of 129Xe are com- πNN interaction has been employed in the recent stud- pared with experimental data (Expt.) and theoretical results ies. When the contact interaction was used in Ref. [38] in the PTSM. The values are given in units of µN . for comparison, the IPM results were increased by a fac- + + − tor of 2 from a2 = 2a0 = 2a1 = 12 obtained by using 1 (g.s.) 3 11 2 1 2 1 2 1 the finite-range interaction. Thus,− in the limit of the LSSM (SN100PN) −0.832 0.590 −1.006 contact interaction, mπ , the discrepancy between LSSM (SNV) −0.858 0.586 −1.012 those IPM results is 10%.→ ∞ This minor difference may ∼ Expt. [53] −0.778 0.58(8) −0.891 come from the improvement of the one-body potential. PTSM [54] −0.268 0.278 −1.13 The first two rows of Table II show our IPM results. We construct an artificial configuration in which the proton 0g7/2 and the neutron 0h11/2 orbitals are partially occupied and the last neutron occupies the 2s1/2 orbital. Table I exhibits the magnetic moments of the ground It is confirmed in the present calculations that the IPM 3 + 11 − 129 state and the lowest 2 and 2 states of Xe. The results are increased approximately by a factor of 2 in the spin g-factors are attenuated by a factor of 0.7 from the infinite pion-mass limit. Comparing the first and second bare values. The same effective g-factors g = 2.68 rows of Table II with the seventh and eighth rows, respec- sν − and gsπ =3.91 were adopted in a PTSM study [54]. The tively, it is found that our IPM results are smaller than agreement with the experimental values is considerably the IPM results of the early studies by 10 20%. The improved in the present LSSM calculations. In particular discrepancy could be attributed to the different− one-body the quality of the ground-state wave function would be potentials and occupation probabilities of single-particle critical to the accuracy of the NSM coefficients. orbitals. 5

The third to sixth rows of Table II show the NSM co- which was originally developed by the G-matrix approach efficients by using the wave functions obtained from the with the use of the Hamada-Johnston potential [55, 56]. LSSM calculations. The configuration mixing reduces Some of the two-body matrix elements were fitted to the the NSM coefficients by factors of 0.8 0.9 from the IPM experimental data of 206Pb, 206Tl, and 206Hg [57, 58]. results. It is noticeable that the results− are almost independent of the effective interactions, whereas the over- lap probability between the ground-state wave functions obtained by using the SN100PN and SNV interactions is 0.85. On the other hand, those quenching factors are moderate compared with the results in the random phase approximation (RPA) [38] and the pair-truncated shell model (PTSM) [41, 42], which are shown in the last three rows. In the PTSM, nuclear wave functions are expressed as linear combinations of configurations that are made of collective pairs of like nucleons. Such a truncation scheme enables the diagonalization of H0 even in an extended valence space [41]. In the earlier PTSM study, the valence space is enlarged to contain four proton orbitals, 2p1/2, 2p3/2, 1f5/2, and 1f7/2, above the present valence space. 1 − The obtained excited states with a spin-parity of 2 are applied to the intermediate states in Eq. (9). The NSM coefficients are two orders of magnitude smaller than the present LSSM results. This situation could be reasonable FIG. 3. The energy spectrum of 199Hg. The experimen- because that approximation of the intermediate states tal data is extracted from Ref. [59]. The spin and parity of exclude the excitations from the core such as type II and the experimental level represented in orange are ambiguously type III excitations in Fig. 1. The type I contributions 1 − 3 − assigned 2 or 2 . should be suppressed since the proton valence space is almost vacant in 129Xe. In fact, the type I contributions account for less than one-tenth of the NSM coefficients aT in the present calculations. Figure 3 shows calculated low-lying energy spectrum In the later PTSM study [42], the valence space is lim- compared with experimental data. The correct spin and ited to one major shell as the present study, and all the 1 − parity of the ground state are reproduced. The second 2 one-particle one-hole excited states are employed as in- state is predicted at 0.458 MeV, which may correspond to termediate states. Although we follow the same prescrip- the negative parity state discovered in experiment with tion, their results are one order of magnitude smaller an excitation energy of 0.455 MeV. In fact a spin-parity than the LSSM results. This inconsistency might be at- − of J π = 1 is assigned as a strong candidate although tributed to the drastic truncation scheme and the mag- 2 π 3 − netic moment could be important in reducing the uncer- J = 2 has not been excluded yet [60–63]. tainty of the NSM. However, the consistency check of the Table III exhibits the NSM coefficients of 199Hg. The IPM calculations is indispensable for the comparison be- simple configuration in the IPM is uniquely determined tween the LSSM and PTSM results. As explained above, by occupying nucleons from the bottom to the Fermi sur- our IPM results are effectively consistent with the IPM face. The last neutron occupies the 2p1/2 orbital, which results in Ref. [35, 36, 38]. We also confirm that the IPM − 199 π 1 results for Hg differ from those in preceding studies gives the correct spin and parity J = 2 . The first two by at most 10%. We utilize the same computational rows show the results in the IPM. We confirm the fact code to calculate∼ the NSM coefficients by using the wave that the NSM coefficients are unexpectedly reduced in functions obtained from the LSSM calculations. the infinite pion-mass limit [37, 38]. As shown in the fourth row, the LSSM results are quenched by 4 12 % from the IPM evaluations. The B. 199Hg − present result of a1 is within the uncertainty estimated in the QRPA calculations with several Skyrme interac- We also perform LSSM calculations for 199Hg and tions [39]. Although the same Skyrme interactions are neighboring nuclei. The neutron valence space consists of employed, the a1 value is drastically reduced in the fully the six orbitals between the magic numbers 82 and 126, self-consistent HFB calculations [40]. The results of a0 0h9/2, 1f7/2, 1f5/2, 2p3/2, 2p1/2, and 0i13/2. The proton and a2 are rather close to the HFB results, whereas those valence space is identical with that of 129Xe. As an ef- values are quenched by one order of magnitude in the fective interaction, we adopt the Kuo-Herling interaction, QRPA calculations. 6

199 the present valence space and the core should be treated TABLE III. The NSM coefficients of Hg in units of explicitly in future studies. In contrast, the isovector 10−2e fm3. Our final results are given in the fourth row. NSM coefficients a1 obtained by the QRPA calculations

a0 a1 a2 are comparable with IPM results as shown in Table III. The dependence of aT on the isospin structure of the IPM (mπ →∞) 7.3 7.3 14.7 P , T -odd πNN interaction was explained with the effec- IPM 8.4 8.4 16.7 tive potential of the P , T -odd πNN interaction [39]. As LSSM (mπ →∞) 8.8 9.2 19.0 can be seen in Eq. (9) of Ref [31], the effective potential LSSM 8.0 7.8 14.7 does not suppress the isovector NSM coefficient a1, but π 1 − LSSM (J = 2 2 ) −0.05 0.4 1.3 a0 and a2. However, the HFB calculations predicted that the isovector NSM coefficient a1 is much more drastically IPM (mπ →∞) [36] 8.7 8.7 17.4 reduced as shown in Table III. It would be difficult to ex- IPM (mπ →∞) [37, 38] 5.8 5.8 11.6 plain the significant reduction of a1 on the basis of the IPM [37, 38] 8.6 8.6 17.2 effective potential. RPA [37, 38] 0.04 5.5 0.9 We discuss a possible origin of the strong dependence IPM [39] 9.5 9.5 19.0 of the NSM coefficients aT on different nuclear models. QRPA [39] 0.2 ↔ 1.0 5.7 ↔ 9.0 1.1 ↔ 2.5 In general low-lying excited states of the same spin and HFB (SLy4) [40] 1.3 −0.6 2.4 parity could be highly mixed, depending on different nu- HFB (SkM∗) [40] 4.1 −2.7 6.9 clear models and effective interactions, with the ground 1 − state. We pay attention to the second lowest 2 state, − which is shown in Fig. 3. The NSM coefficients in the 1 Here, we present the nuclear spin matrix elements 2 2 199 state are given in the fifth row of Table III. It is noticeable of Hg, which are key information on the contribu- that those values are more than one order of magnitude tion from the P , T -odd electron-nucleon interaction to − smaller than those in the ground state. Thus, if the 1 the atomic EDM. The spin matrix elements of neu- 2 2 state is mixed with the ground state to some extent in tron and proton are computed as σ = 0.322 and νz other models, the NSM coefficients will be considerably σ = 0.006, respectively. Thoseh resultsi support− the πz reduced from the desirable values in the ground state, conclusionh i − from a PTSM calculation [64] that the simple which are comparable with the IPM evaluation. estimate is adequate unless nucleons outside the valence In order to understand the strong quenching of the space greatly contribute to the spin matrix elements. − NSM coefficients in the 1 state, we analyze the micro- We attempt to exploit a modified Kuo-Herling inter- 2 2 scopic nuclear structure. A significant difference between action, which was adjusted further by mainly using high- − the lowest two 1 states is the purity of the νp 0+ spin excitation energies of nuclei where the numbers of 2 1/2 ⊗ 1 valence nucleon holes are 2 5 [65]. When the revised ef- configuration, where the ground state of 200Hg is denoted − + 199 fective interaction is employed, the lowest negative par- by 01 . In the ground state of Hg, the spectroscopic 21 factor defined by Eq. (B1) for the neutron 2p orbital ity state of each spin J 2 is calculated lower than 1/2 that with the adopted interaction≥ by 0.1 MeV. More- is calculated as S = 0.93, which accounts for 41% of over, the reduced electric quadrupole∼ transition proba- the sum-rule value in Eq. (B2). This value is consistent bility, B(E2), from the 8+ state to the 6+ state in 200Hg with experimental results of S = 0.70(35) [62, 66] and 1 1 + is calculated as 7 W.u., which is inconsistent with the ex- S =1.10 [67]. Since the νp1/2 01 configuration is simi- + + ⊗ perimental value 41(14) W.u. Since the B(E2;82 61 ) lar to the simple configuration of the IPM, it is reasonable value is calculated as 26 W.u., the lowest 8+ state→ in ex- that the quenching of the NSM coefficients is moderate + periment would correspond to the 82 state. In contrast, in the ground state. In contrast, the spectroscopic factor low-lying states are little affected by this revision. The 1 − is calculated as S =0.05 in the 2 2 state. It is remarkable NSM coefficients are reduced by less than 2%. that the ratio of the spectroscopic factors of the lowest 1 − two 2 states is comparable with the ratio of the results of each NSM coefficient. IV. DISCUSSION It has been demonstrated that experimental energy spectra of several nuclei in the vicinity of 208Pb are sys- In this section, we focus on the serious discrepancies tematically reproduced with the Kuo-Herling interaction between the theoretical predictions on the NSM coeffi- and its modified version [65, 68–75]. Those agreements 199 cients aT of Hg. It was argued in the QRPA study [39] ensure the validity of the effective interaction and the 1 − that the neutron excitation from the core plays a cru- ordering of the lowest two 2 states. It is known that cial role in the destructive interference with a0 and a2. electromagnetic properties can be used to confirm such This effect is excluded in the present framework owing assignments thanks to the sensitivity to details of nuclear to the restricted valence space, which might be respon- structure [76]. The magnetic moment of the ground state 199 sible for the relatively moderate quenching in the LSSM in Hg was precisely measured as 0.506µN [59]. In the calculations. The P , T -even NN interactions between LSSM calculation, the magnetic moment is calculated 7 with effective spin g-factors quenched by a factor of 0.8 2p3/2 orbitals are more important than the core excita- 1 − + 200 as 0.459µN . The theoretical magnetic moment of the 2 2 tion to the 22 state of Hg. For example, the low- − state is 0.612µN . Since these theoretical values of the est two 5 states mainly consist of the νp 2+ and − − 2 1/2 1 1 and 1 states are close to each other, we cannot con- + ⊗ 2 1 2 2 νf5/2 01 configurations as illustrated in Fig. 4. Thus, clude their correspondence to the experimental ground −⊗ the 5 states inherit the collective nature of the 2+ state state utilizing the magnetic moment. 2 1 200 5 − 1 − of Hg and the B(E2; 2 2 1 ) values are enhanced + → 5 − between the νp1/2 21 configuration in the 2 states TABLE IV. B(E2) values in units of W.u. The effective + ⊗ and the νp1/2 0 configuration in the ground state. As charges eπ = 1.5e and eν = 0.8e are determined by fitting 1 ⊗ 199 B(E2) values in even-even Hg isotopes. shown in Table IV, the summed B(E2) values in Hg are very similar to the B(E2;2+ 0+) value in 200Hg. If 199 1 − 1 1 Hg Expt. LSSM LSSM → 1 − → 2 2 the lowest two states were inverted from their exper- 5 − 1 − 2 2 1 → 2 1 17.6(3) 8.7 2.8 imental order, the summed B(E2) value of the ground 5 − 1 − 2 2 → 2 1 4.8(10) 14.2 0.9 state should be suppressed. sum 22.4(10) 22.9 3.7

3 − 1 − 2 1 → 2 1 16.1(11) 7.2 8.1 3 − 1 − 2 2 → 2 1 8.1(20) 10.4 3.1 sum 24.2(20) 17.6 11.2 200Hg Expt. LSSM + + 21 → 01 24.57 (22) 22.7

199 FIG. 5. The integrated NSM coeﬃcient a1 of Hg in the π 1 − ground state (J = 2 1 ). The horizontal axis represents the excitation energy of the intermediate states.

Figure 5 shows the accumulation of the isovector NSM coefficient a1 in the ground state. The type II contribution is suppressed in 199Hg in contrast to 129Xe because FIG. 4. The predicted main configurations of low-lying the proton valence space is almost fully occupied. The states in 199Hg. The magenta and green arrows represent 200 type I and type III contributions form drastic increases the coupling of the neutron 2p1/2 and 1f5/2 orbitals to Hg, + at 7 and 24 MeV. The NSM operator demands one or respectively. The dashed arrows mean that the νp1/2 ⊗ 22 5 − three harmonic oscillator excitation, which corresponds configuration is a minor component in the 2 states. The to each characteristic excitation energy. As shown in experimental B(E2) values are given in W.u. Fig. 5 in Ref. [39], such two bumps are also found in the QRPA calculations. As mentioned above, the residual interactions between the valence space and the core are not Table IV exhibits B(E2) values between low-lying 199 included explicitly in the LSSM calculations. The draw- states in Hg. The effective charges eπ = 1.5e and back of the present framework appears in the plateau re- eν =0.8e are determined so that the experimental B(E2) 200,202,204,206 gion between two bumps in Fig. 5. Although, the onset values of Hg are reproduced in the LSSM of the second bump is more gentle in the QRPA calcula- calculations. The B(E2) enhancement in low-lying ex- 199 tions [39], one can find that the two bumps are separated cited states of odd-mass nuclei such as Hg was ex- by an almost flat section except for the result with SIII plained with the core excitation model [77]. In this Skyrme interaction. 3 − 5 − model, the lowest 2 and 2 states and the second low- Figure 6 shows the accumulation of isoscalar NSM co- − − est 3 and 5 states are interpreted as admixtures of 1 − 2 2 efficient a0 in the 2 state. It is found that the significant + + 2 the νp1/2 21 and νp1/2 22 configurations [78, 79]. reduction results from the cancellation between the con- However,⊗ the present LSSM⊗ calculations suggest that tributions from the first and second terms of the NSM the single-particle excitations to the neutron 1f5/2 and operator. The same feature is found in a0 obtained in 8 the QRPA calculations as shown in Fig. 6 of Ref. [39]. the electric dipole polarizability of the atomic system is accurately reproduced with a discrepancy of 2% [84]. The state-of-the-art atomic calculation pre- 3 −18 sented dA [e cm]/S [e fm ]=3.20 10 . Combining the atomic factor and our result, the× 129Xe atomic EDM is predicted in units of e cm as

d 129Xe = 1.7 10−18g(0) 1.8 10−18g(1) − × − × 3.7 10−18g(2), (13) − ×

where gπNN = 14.11 is adopted [85]. The upper bound in experiment is d(129Xe) < 1.4 10−27e cm [30]. The atomic factor of 199Hg× has been calculated in the Dirac-Fock method [80, 81], the multi-configuration Dirac-Hartree-Fock method [86, 87], the RPA [80, 81], the configuration interaction method [81], and the RCC 199 1 − FIG. 6. The integrated NSM coefficient a0 of Hg in the 2 2 model [88–91]. The latest study based on the RCC state. The contributions from the first term and the second 3 −17 model presented dA [e cm]/S [e fm ]= 1.77 10 . In term of the NSM operator are shown in dashed line and dash- this model, the electric dipole polarizability− × is well re- dotted line, respectively. produced. Combining the atomic factor and our result, which is given in units of e fm3 as

S 199Hg =0.079gg(0) +0.075gg(1) +0.143gg(2), (14) V. CONCLUSION the atomic EDM is calculated in units of e cm as

We have calculated the nuclear Schiff moments (NSMs) d 199Hg = 2.0 10−17g(0) 1.9 10−17g(1) 129 199 − × − × of Xe and Hg using the microscopic wave func- 3.7 10−17g(2), (15) tions obtained from large-scale shell-model (LSSM) cal- − × culations. The quenching of the NSM coefficients due whereas the current limit is given in 95% C.L. as to the residual interactions is moderate compared with d(199Hg) < 7.4 10−30e cm [26]. the results in the random phase approximation (RPA), × the quasi-particle RPA (QRPA), the fully self-consistent Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov (HFB) theory, and the pair- ACKNOWLEDGMENTS truncated shell model except for the isovector NSM coef- 199 ficient a1 of Hg obtained from the RPA and QRPA calculations. It has been found that the NSM coefficients in This research was supported by MEXT and JICFuS as 1 − 199 post-K priority issue 9 (hp180179, hp190160) and Pro- the 2 2 state of Hg are one order of magnitude smaller than the results in the ground state. Consequently, if gram for Promoting Researches on the Supercomputer − “Fugaku” (Simulation for basic science: from fundamen- the 1 state is mixed to the ground state by using dif- 2 2 tal laws of particles to creation of nuclei). It was also ferent nuclear models or effective interactions, the NSM supported by KAKENHI grant (17K05433). The numer- coefficients could be considerably reduced. ical calculation was performed mainly on the Oakforest- The reliability of our calculations is limited by the PACS supercomputer for Multidisciplinary Computa- one-particle one-hole approximation to the intermediate tional Sciences Project of Tsukuba University (xg18i035). states, whereas the residual correlations might be crucial We acknowledge Cenxi Yuan for the discussions about in the strong quenching of the NSM coefficients. The the Kuo Herling interaction, Yutaka Utsuno for the dis- residual interactions between the present valence space cussions about the spectroscopic factor, Naotaka Yoshi- and the core should be considered in future studies. naga, and Koji Higashiyama for helpful discussions. Our final result for 129Xe is given in units of e fm3 as

S 129Xe = 0.038gg(0) 0.041gg(1) 0.082gg(2). − − − Appendix A: Matrix elements (12)

The 129Xe atomic EDM induced by the NSM has The NSM operator and the P , T -odd πNN interaction been calculated in the Dirac-Fock method [80, 81], are expressed as the coupled-perturbed-Hartree-Fock method [82], the † † † RPA [80, 81], and the relativistic coupled-cluster (RCC) Sz = sij ci cj , V = vijklci cj clck, (A1) model [83]. In the recent study using the RCC model, Xij Xi

ψ0 Sz ψn ψn V ψ0 † ′ ′ ′ ′ † = ψ0 si j ebi aj apbh ψ0 Xi′j′

ψ b a v a†c†c b† ψ × 0 h p ijkl i j l k 0 Xijkl

† e = shpvpjhl ψ0 cj cl ψ0 . (A4) Xjl e The one-body and two-body matrix elements in Eqs. (A2)-(A4) are computed by using the ground-state wave functions ψ0 obtained from the LSSM calculations. Figure 7| showsi a schematic explanation of the FIG. 7. A schematic diagram illustrating the one-body contribution to the NSM from each type of the interme- and two-body transitions through the NSM operator (solid diate states. arrows) and the P , T -odd πNN interaction (dashed arrows), respectively. The P , T -odd πNN interaction represented by a wavy line should excite a proton, which is referred to as a participant, across at least one shell gap. The participant proton Appendix B: Spectroscopic factor interacts with a “spectator”, which is a proton or neutron. Although the spectators are shown in the valence space, nu- The spectroscopic factors for the single-neutron strip- cleons in the core also behave as spectators that remain in the 199 same orbitals (j = l). The indices indicating single-particle ping reactions of Hg are defined by [92] states correspond to those in Eqs. (A2)-(A4). 1 Sk(ni,Ji; nf ,Jf )= 2Jf +1 2 200 † 199 Hg(nf ,Jf ) ck Hg(ni,Ji) , (B1) For type I excitations, the many-body matrix elements × D E in Eq. (9) can be reduced to where k is the single-particle orbital of the neutron and (n,J) denotes the nth lowest state with the spin J. In 2 ψ0 Sz ψn ψn V ψ0 general C is multiplied, where C is the Clebsch-Gordan 199 † coefficient of isospin. In the present calculations of Hg, ′ ′ ′ † = ψ0 si j eci ′ aj apch ψ0 it follows C = 1. The spectroscopic factors satisfy sum Xi′j′ rules as † † † ψ0 c ap vijkla c clck ψ0 × h i j (2J + 1)S Xij Xk≤l f k nXf Jf † e † † ′ = si pvpjkl ψ0 ci′ ch ψ0 ψ0 chcjclck ψ0 , (A2) i = (2Ji + 1) (2j + 1) N (ni,Ji) , (B2) Xi′j Xk≤l − k e i f where Nk and N are the occupation numbers of a single- † k where ai is the proton creation operator of a single- particle orbital k in the initial and final states, respec- particle orbital higher than the valence space. Here, tively. 10

Appendix C: Sign conventions of the P , T -odd πNN interaction TABLE V. The sign conventions of FT and the isospin z- component of neutron. FT = −1 means the sign convention is opposite to ours. Table V summarizes the sign conventions of FT in Eq. (4) and the isospin z-component of neutron, which is F0 F1 F2 hτzin involved in the sign of V1 in Eq. (3), adopted in preced- Engel et al. [39,40]andthispaper +1 +1 +1 +1 ing works and ours. We infer the isospin z-component Domitriev et al. [37, 38] −1 +1 +1 (−1) e of neutron τz n = 1 adopted by Dmitriev et al. from Yoshinaga et al. [41, 42] +1 −1 +1 +1 Eq. (7) in Ref.h i [38].− This assumption is also supported by the consistency of the IPM results of a1 as shown in Tables II and III. In this paper we follow the conventions of Refs. [39, 40].

[1] P. G. H. Sandars, The electric dipole moment of an atom, [13] J. Baron, W. C. Campbell, D. DeMille, J. M. Doyle, Physics Letters 14, 194 (1965). G. Gabrielse, Y. V. Gurevich, P. W. Hess, N. R. Hut- [2] P. G. H. Sandars, Enhancement factor for the electric zler, E. Kirilov, I. Kozyryev, B. R. O’Leary, C. D. Panda, dipole moment of the valence electron in an alkali atom, M. F. Parsons, E. S. Petrik, B. Spaun, A. C. Vutha, and Physics Letters 22, 290 (1966). A. D. West (ACME Collaboration), Order of magnitude [3] P. G. H. Sandars and R. M. Sternheimer, Electric-dipole- smaller limit on the electric dipole moment of the elec- moment enhancement factor for the thallium atom, and tron, Science 343, 269 (2014). a new upper limit on the electric dipole moment of the [14] V. Andreev, D. G. Ang, D. DeMille, J. M. Doyle, electron, Phys. Rev. A 11, 473 (1975). G. Gabrielse, J. Haefner, N. R. Hutzler, Z. Lasner, [4] H. S. Nataraj, B. K. Sahoo, B. P. Das, and C. Meisenhelder, B. R. O’Leary, C. D. Panda, A. D. D. Mukherjee, Intrinsic electric dipole moments West, E. P. West, and X. Wu (ACME Collaboration), of paramagnetic atoms: Rubidium and cesium, Improved limit on the electric dipole moment of the elec- Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 033002 (2008). tron, Nature 562, 355 (2018). [5] H. S. Nataraj, B. K. Sahoo, B. P. Das, and D. Mukherjee, [15] V. V. Flambaum and I. B. Khriplovich, New bounds on Reappraisal of the electric dipole moment enhancement the electric dipole moment of the electron and on T-odd factor for thallium, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 200403 (2011). electron-nucleon coupling, Zh. Eksp. Theor. Fiz 89, 1505 [6] D. Mukherjee, B. K. Sahoo, H. S. Nataraj, and B. P. (1985). Das, Relativistic coupled cluster (RCC) computation of [16] A.-M. M˚artensson-Pendrill and P. Oster,¨ Calculations of the electric dipole moment enhancement factor of fran- atomic electric dipole moments, Physica Scripta 36, 444 cium due to the violation of time reversal symmetry, The (1987). Journal of Physical Chemistry A 113, 12549 (2009). [17] L. I. Schiff, Measurability of nuclear electric dipole mo- [7] J. S. M. Ginges and V. V. Flambaum, Violations of fun- ments, Phys. Rev. 132, 2194 (1963). damental symmetries in atoms and tests of unification [18] C.-P. Liu and J. Engel, Schiff screening of rela- theories of elementary particles, Physics Reports 397, 63 tivistic nucleon electric-dipole moments by electrons, (2004). Phys. Rev. C 76, 028501 (2007). [8] M. C. Weisskopf, J. P. Carrico, H. Gould, E. Lipworth, [19] C.-P. Liu, M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, W. C. Haxton, R. G. E. and T. S. Stein, Electric dipole moment of the cesium Timmermans, and A. E. L. Dieperink, Atomic electric atom. A new upper limit to the electric dipole moment dipole moments: The Schiff theorem and its corrections, of the electron, Phys. Rev. Lett. 21, 1645 (1968). Phys. Rev. C 76, 035503 (2007). [9] S. A. Murthy, D. Krause, Z. L. Li, and L. R. Hunter, [20] S. K. Lamoreaux, J. P. Jacobs, B. R. Heckel, F. J. Raab, New limits on the electron electric dipole moment from and N. Fortson, New constraints on time-reversal asym- cesium, Phys. Rev. Lett. 63, 965 (1989). metry from a search for a permanent electric dipole mo- [10] E. D. Commins, S. B. Ross, D. DeMille, and B. C. Re- ment of 199Hg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, 2275 (1987). gan, Improved experimental limit on the electric dipole [21] J. P. Jacobs, W. M. Klipstein, S. K. Lamoreaux, B. R. moment of the electron, Phys. Rev. A 50, 2960 (1994). Heckel, and E. N. Fortson, Testing time-reversal symme- [11] B. C. Regan, E. D. Commins, C. J. Schmidt, and D. De- try using 199Hg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 3782 (1993). Mille, New limit on the electron electric dipole moment, [22] J. P. Jacobs, W. M. Klipstein, S. K. Lamoreaux, B. R. Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 071805 (2002). Heckel, and E. N. Fortson, Limit on the electric-dipole [12] A. Uchiyama, K. Harada, T. Inoue, H. Kawamura, moment of 199Hg using synchronous optical pumping, K. Tanaka, M. Itoh, T. Aoki, A. Hatakeyama, Y. Taka- Phys. Rev. A 52, 3521 (1995). hashi, and Y. Sakemi, Development of a dual iso- [23] M. V. Romalis, W. C. Griffith, J. P. Jacobs, and E. N. tope co-magnetometer using laser cooled rubidium to- Fortson, New limit on the permanent electric dipole mo- ward electron electric dipole moment measurement using ment of 199Hg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 2505 (2001). francium, Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1206, [24] W. C. Griffith, M. D. Swallows, T. H. Loftus, M. V. 012008 (2019). Romalis, B. R. Heckel, and E. N. Fortson, Improved limit on the permanent electric dipole moment of 199Hg, 11

Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 101601 (2009). [40] S. Ban, J. Dobaczewski, J. Engel, and A. Shukla, Fully [25] M. D. Swallows, T. H. Loftus, W. C. Griffith, B. R. self-consistent calculations of nuclear Schiff moments, Heckel, E. N. Fortson, and M. V. Romalis, Techniques Phys. Rev. C 82, 015501 (2010). used to search for a permanent electric dipole moment [41] N. Yoshinaga, K. Higashiyama, R. Arai, and E. Teruya, of the 199Hg atom and the implications for CP violation, Nuclear Schiff moments for the lowest 1/2+ states Phys. Rev. A 87, 012102 (2013). in Xe isotopes, Phys. Rev. C 87, 044332 (2013); Er- [26] B. Graner, Y. Chen, E. G. Lindahl, and B. R. Heckel, ratum: Nuclear Schiff moments for the lowest 1/2+ Reduced limit on the permanent electric dipole moment states in Xe isotopes [Phys. Rev. C 87, 044332 (2013)], of 199Hg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 161601 (2016); Erra- Phys. Rev. C 89, 069902 (2014). tum: Reduced limit on the permanent electric dipole [42] E. Teruya, N. Yoshinaga, K. Higashiyama, and K. Asahi, moment of 199Hg [Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 161601 (2016)], Effects of particle-hole excitations to nuclear Schiff mo- Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 119901 (2017). ments in Xe isotopes, Phys. Rev. C 96, 015501 (2017). [27] T. G. Vold, F. J. Raab, B. Heckel, and E. N. Fortson, [43] V. Spevak, N. Auerbach, and V. V. Flambaum, En- Search for a permanent electric dipole moment on the hanced T -odd, P -odd electromagnetic moments in reflec- 129Xe atom, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 2229 (1984). tion asymmetric nuclei, Phys. Rev. C 56, 1357 (1997). [28] M. A. Rosenberry and T. E. Chupp, Atomic [44] I. B. Khriplovich and S. Lamoreaux, electric dipole moment measurement using spin CP violation without strangeness: electric dipole moments of particles, atoms, and molecules exchange pumped masers of 129Xe and 3He, (Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 1997). Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 22 (2001). [45] W. Dekens, J. de Vries, J. Bsaisou, W. Bernreuther, [29] F. Allmendinger, I. Engin, W. Heil, S. Karpuk, H.-J. C. Hanhart, U.-G. Meißner, A. Nogga, and A. Wirzba, Krause, B. Niederländer, A. Offenhäusser, M. Repetto, Unraveling models of CP violation through electric dipole U. Schmidt, and S. Zimmer, Measurement of the per- moments of light nuclei, Journal of High Energy Physics manent electric dipole moment of the 129Xe atom, 2014, 69 (2014). Phys. Rev. A 100, 022505 (2019). [46] N. Shimizu, T. Mizusaki, Y. Utsuno, and Y. Tsunoda, [30] N. Sachdeva, I. Fan, E. Babcock, M. Burghoff, Thick-restart block Lanczos method for large-scale shell- T. E. Chupp, S. Degenkolb, P. Fierlinger, S. Haude, model calculations, Computer Physics Communications E. Kraegeloh, W. Kilian, S. Knappe-Grüneberg, F. Kuch- 244, 372 (2019). ler, T. Liu, M. Marino, J. Meinel, K. Rolfs, [47] B. A. Brown, N. J. Stone, J. R. Stone, I. S. Towner, and + Z. Salhi, A. Schnabel, J. T. Singh, S. Stuiber, M. Hjorth-Jensen, Magnetic moments of the 21 states W. A. Terrano, L. Trahms, and J. Voigt, New around 132Sn, Phys. Rev. C 71, 044317 (2005). limit on the permanent electric dipole moment of [48] L. Kaya, A. Vogt, P. Reiter, M. Siciliano, B. Birken- 129Xe using 3He comagnetometry and squid detection, bach, A. Blazhev, L. Coraggio, E. Teruya, N. Yoshinaga, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 143003 (2019). K. Higashiyama, K. Arnswald, D. Bazzacco, A. Bracco, [31] J. Engel, M. Bender, J. Dobaczewski, J. H. de Jesus, and B. Bruyneel, L. Corradi, et al., High-spin structure in P. Olbratowski, Time-reversal violating Schiff moment of the transitional nucleus 131Xe: Competitive neutron and 225Ra, Phys. Rev. C 68, 025501 (2003). proton alignment in the vicinity of the N = 82 shell clo- [32] J. Dobaczewski, J. Engel, M. Kortelainen, and P. Becker, sure, Phys. Rev. C 98, 014309 (2018). Correlating schiff moments in the light actinides with oc- [49] Y. Utsuno, T. Otsuka, N. Shimizu, M. Honma, tupole moments, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 232501 (2018). T. Mizusaki, Y. Tsunoda, and T. Abe, Recent shell- [33] R. H. Parker, M. R. Dietrich, M. R. Kalita, N. D. Lemke, model results for exotic nuclei, EPJ Web of Conferences K. G. Bailey, M. Bishof, J. P. Greene, R. J. Holt, W. Ko- 66, 02106 (2014). rsch, Z.-T. Lu, P. Mueller, T. P. O’Connor, and J. T. [50] L. Kaya, A. Vogt, P. Reiter, M. Siciliano, N. Shimizu, Singh, First measurement of the atomic electric dipole Y. Utsuno, H.-K. Wang, A. Gargano, L. Corag- moment of 225Ra, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 233002 (2015). gio, N. Itaco, K. Arnswald, D. Bazzacco, B. Birken- [34] M. Bishof, R. H. Parker, K. G. Bailey, J. P. Greene, R. J. bach, A. Blazhev, A. Bracco, et al., Isomer spec- Holt, M. R. Kalita, W. Korsch, N. D. Lemke, Z.-T. Lu, troscopy in 133Ba and high-spin structure of 134Ba, P. Mueller, T. P. O’Connor, J. T. Singh, and M. R. Diet- Phys. Rev. C 100, 024323 (2019). rich, Improved limit on the 225Ra electric dipole moment, [51] M. S. R. Laskar, S. Saha, R. Palit, S. N. Mishra, Phys. Rev. C 94, 025501 (2016). N. Shimizu, Y. Utsuno, E. Ideguchi, Z. Naik, F. S. [35] V. V. Flambaum, I. B. Khriplovich, and O. P. Sushkov, Babra, S. Biswas, S. Kumar, S. K. Mohanta, C. S. Limit on the constant of T -nonconserving nucleon- Palshetkar, P. Singh, and P. C. Srivastava, g-factor nucleon interaction, Physics Letters B 162, 213 (1985). measurement of the 2738 keV isomer in 135La, [36] V. V. Flambaum, I. B. Khriplovich, and O. P. Sushkov, Phys. Rev. C 99, 014308 (2019). On the P -and T -nonconserving nuclear moments, Nu- [52] M. S. R. Laskar, R. Palit, S. N. Mishra, N. Shimizu, clear Physics A 449, 750 (1986). Y. Utsuno, E. Ideguchi, U. Garg, S. Biswas, F. S. [37] V. F. Dmitriev and R. A. Sen’kov, P -and T -violating Babra, R. Gala, C. S. Palshetkar, and Z. Naik, Schiff moment of the mercury nucleus, Physics of Atomic Structure of the 11/2− isomeric state in 133La, Nuclei 66, 1940 (2003). Phys. Rev. C 101, 034315 (2020). [38] V. F. Dmitriev, R. A. Sen’kov, and N. Auerbach, Ef- [53] B. S. J. Timar, Z. Elekes, Nuclear data sheets for A = fects of core polarization on the nuclear Schiff moment, 129, Nuclear Data Sheets 121, 143 (2014). Phys. Rev. C 71, 035501 (2005). [54] K. Higashiyama and N. Yoshinaga, Pair-truncated [39] J. H. de Jesus and J. Engel, Time-reversal-violating Schiff shell-model analysis of nuclei around mass 130, moment of 199Hg, Phys. Rev. C 72, 045503 (2005). Physical Review C 83, 034321 (2011); Erra- tum: Pair-truncated shell-model analysis of nuclei 12

around mass 130 [Phys. Rev. C 83, 034321 (2011)], [72] N. Cieplicka-Orynczak, C. Michelagnoli, S. Leoni, B. For- Phys. Rev. C 89, 049903 (2014). nal, G. Benzoni, A. Blanc, S. Bottoni, F. C. L. Crespi, [55] T. T. S. Kuo and G. Herling, US Naval Research Labora- L. W. Iskra, M. Jentschel, et al., The Low-spin structure tory Report No. 2258, 1971 (unpublished), Nucl. Phys. A of 206Tl studied by γ-ray spectroscopy from thermal neu- 181, 113 (1972); G. H. Herling and T. T. S. Kuo, Two- tron capture reaction, Acta Physica Polonica B 49, 561 particle states in 210Pb, 210Bi and 210Po with realistic (2018). forces, 181, 113 (1972). [73] Z. Podolyák, G. F. Farrelly, P. H. Regan, A. B. Garnswor- [56] J. B. Mcgrory and T. T. S. Kuo, Shell model calculations thy, S. J. Steer, M. Górska, J. Benlliure, E. Casarejos, of two to four identical ”particle” systems near 208Pb, S. Pietri, J. Gerl, et al., Proton-hole excitation in the Nucl. Phys. A 247, 283 (1975). closed shell nucleus 205Au, Physics Letters B 672, 116 [57] J. Blomqvist, L. Rydström, R. J. Liotta, and C. Pomar, (2009). Multiplet structure in 205Pb and 203Pb, Nuclear Physics [74] Z. Podolyák, S. J. Steer, S. Pietri, M. Górska, P. H. A 423, 253 (1984). Regan, D. Rudolph, A. B. Garnsworthy, R. Hoischen, [58] L. Rydström, J. Blomqvist, R. J. Liotta, and C. Pomar, J. Gerl, H. J. Wollersheim, et al., Structure of neutron- Structure of proton-deficient nuclei near 208Pb, Nuclear rich nuclei around the N = 126 closed shell; the yrast 205 π + Physics A 512, 217 (1990). structure of Au126 up to spin-parity I = (19/2 ), [59] B. Singh, Nuclear data sheets for A = 199, Nuclear Data The European Physical Journal A 42, 489 (2009). Sheets 1, 79 (2007). [75] S. J. Steer, Z. Podolyák, S. Pietri, M. Górska, P. H. [60] B. Jung and J. Svedberg, The electron spectrum of Regan, D. Rudolph, E. Werner-Malento, A. B. Gar- 199 81Tl , Nuclear Physics 20, 630 (1960). nsworthy, R. Hoischen, J. Gerl, H. J. Wollersheim, [61] R. W. Bauer, L. Grodzins, and H. H. Wilson, Decay of K. H. Maier, H. Grawe, F. Becker, P. Bednarczyk, Tl199 and Au199, Phys. Rev. 128, 694 (1962). L. Cáceres, P. Doornenbal, H. Geissel, J. Grebosz, A. Ke- [62] G. J. Mathews, F. M. Bernthal, and J. D. Im- lic, I. Kojouharov, N. Kurz, F. Montes, W. Prokopow- mele, Population of levels in 199Hg following 199Tl de- icz, T. Saito, H. Schaffner, S. Tashenov, A. Heinz, cay and intermediate coupling calculations for 199Hg, M. Pf´’utzner, T. Kurtukian-Nieto, G. Benzoni, A. Jung- Phys. Rev. C 11, 587 (1975). claus, D. L. Balabanski, C. Brandau, B. A. Brown, A. M. [63] M. A. Lone, E. D. Earle, and G. A. Bartholomew, Res- Bruce, W. N. Catford, I. J. Cullen, Z. Dombrádi, M. E. onance neutron capture in 198,199,201 Hg, Nuclear Physics Estevez, W. Gelletly, G. Ilie, J. Jolie, G. A. Jones, A 243, 413 (1975). M. Kmiecik, F. G. Kondev, R. Krücken, S. Lalkovski, [64] K. Yanase, N. Yoshinaga, K. Higashiyama, and Z. Liu, A. Maj, S. Myalski, S. Schwertel, T. Shizuma, N. Yamanaka, Electric dipole moment of 199Hg P. M. Walker, and O. Wieland, Single-particle behav- atom from P , CP -odd electron-nucleon interaction, ior at N = 126: Isomeric decays in neutron-rich 204Pt, Phys. Rev. D 99, 075021 (2019). Phys. Rev. C 78, 061302 (2008). [65] B. Szpak, K. H. Maier, A. S. Smolkowska, B. Fornal, [76] G. Neyens, M. Kowalska, D. Yordanov, K. Blaum, R. Broda, M. P. Carpenter, N. Cieplicka, R. V. F. P. Himpe, P. Lievens, S. Mallion, R. Neugart, N. Ver- Janssens, W. Królas, T. Paw lat, J. Wrzesiński, and meulen, Y. Utsuno, and T. Otsuka, Measurement S. Zhu, Yrast structure of the two-proton- and three- of the spin and magnetic moment of 31Mg: Evi- neutron-hole nucleus 203Hg from the decay of a 53/2+ dence for a strongly deformed intruder ground state, isomer, Phys. Rev. C 83, 064315 (2011). Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 022501 (2005). [66] R. A. Moyer, Deuteron-induced reactions on the even- [77] A. de Shalit, Core excitations in nondeformed, odd-A, even isotopes of mercury, Phys. Rev. C 5, 1678 (1972). nuclei, Phys. Rev. 122, 1530 (1961). [67] M. Vergnes, S. Grafeuille, G. Rotbard, G. Berrier- [78] R. Kalish, R. R. Borchers, and H. W. Kugel, Revised level Ronsin, J. Vernotte, J. M. Maison, S. Fortier, scheme of 199Hg following Coulomb excitation, Nuclear R. Tamisier, P. Van Isacker, and J. Jolie, Transfer Physics A 161, 637 (1970). in the light Hg isotopes and the U(6/12) models, [79] R. Vianden and K. Krien, Quadrupole moment of the Phys. Rev. C 31, 2071 (1985). 5 − 197 2 , 134 keV state in Hg, Nuclear Physics A 277, 442 [68] J. Wrzesiński, G. J. Lane, K. H. Maier, R. V. F. (1977). Janssens, G. D. Dracoulis, R. Broda, A. P. Byrne, [80] V. A. Dzuba, V. V. Flambaum, J. S. M. Ginges, and M. P. Carpenter, R. M. Clark, M. Cromaz, B. Fornal, M. G. Kozlov, Electric dipole moments of Hg, Xe, Rn, T. Lauritsen, A. O. Macchiavelli, M. Rejmund, B. Sz- Ra, Pu, and TlF induced by the nuclear Schiff mo- pak, K. Vetter, and S. Zhu, High-spin yrast structure ment and limits on time-reversal violating interactions, 204 + of Hg from the decay of a four-hole, 22 isomer, Phys. Rev. A 66, 012111 (2002). Phys. Rev. C 92, 044327 (2015). [81] V. A. Dzuba, V. V. Flambaum, and S. G. Porsev, Calcu- [69] B. Silvestre-Brac and J. P. Boisson, Shell model calcula- lation of (P,T )-odd electric dipole moments for the dia- 205 205 211 211 tions in the lead region: Hg, Tl, Po, and Bi, magnetic atoms 129Xe, 171Yb, 199Hg, 211Rn, and 225Ra, Phys. Rev. C 24, 717 (1981). Phys. Rev. A 80, 032120 (2009). [70] R. Broda, K. H. Maier, B. Fornal, J. Wrzesiński, B. Sz- [82] Y. Singh, B. K. Sahoo, and B. P. Das, Ab initio de- pak, M. P. Carpenter, R. V. F. Janssens, W. Królas, termination of the P - and T -violating coupling con- T. Paw llat, and S. Zhu, High-spin states and isomers stants in atomic Xe by the relativistic-coupled-cluster 204 in the one-proton-hole and three-neutron-hole Tl iso- method, Phys. Rev. A 89, 030502 (2014); Erratum: Ab tope, Phys. Rev. C 84, 014330 (2011). initio determination of the P - and T -violating cou- [71] M. Y. Chen, S. C. Cheng, W. Y. Lee, A. M. Rushton, and pling constants in atomic Xe by the relativistic-coupled- C. S. Wu, Resonance processes and nuclear excitation in cluster method [Phys. Rev. A 89, 030502(R) (2014)], muonic 205Tl, Nuclear Physics A 181, 25 (1972). 13

Phys. Rev. A 90, 039903 (2014). of atomic mercury, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 083001 (2009); [83] A. Sakurai, B. K. Sahoo, K. Asahi, and B. P. Publisher’s Note: Probing CP violation with the electric Das, Relativistic many-body theory of the electric dipole moment of atomic mercury [Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, dipole moment of 129Xe and its implications for 083001 (2009)], Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 119902 (2009); probing new physics beyond the standard model, Erratum: Probing CP violation with the electric dipole Phys. Rev. A 100, 020502 (2019). moment of atomic mercury [Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 083001 [84] A. Sakurai, B. K. Sahoo, and B. P. Das, Electric (2009)], Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 059902 (2015). dipole polarizability of 129Xe using the relativistic [89] Y. Singh and B. K. Sahoo, Rigorous limits on the coupled-cluster and the normal coupled-cluster methods, hadronic and semileptonic CP-violating coupling con- Phys. Rev. A 97, 062510 (2018). stants from the electric dipole moment of 199Hg, [85] N. Yamanaka and E. Hiyama, Standard model contribu- Phys. Rev. A 91, 030501 (2015). tion to the electric dipole moment of the deuteron, 3H, [90] B. K. Sahoo, Improved limits on the hadronic and semi- and 3He nuclei, Journal of High Energy Physics 2016, 67 hadronic CP violating parameters and role of a dark (2016). force carrier in the electric dipole moment of 199Hg, [86] L. Radˇzi¯ut˙e, G. Gaigalas, P. Jönsson, and J. Bieroń, Mul- Phys. Rev. D 95, 013002 (2017). ticonfiguration Dirac-Hartree-Fock calculations of atomic [91] B. K. Sahoo and B. P. Das, Relativistic normal coupled- electric dipole moments of 225Ra, 199Hg, and 171Yb, cluster theory for accurate determination of electric Phys. Rev. A 90, 012528 (2014). dipole moments of atoms: First application to the 199Hg [87] L. Radˇzi¯ut˙e, G. Gaigalas, P. Jönsson, and J. Bieroń, atom, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 203001 (2018). Electric dipole moments of superheavy elements: A case [92] P. Ring and P. Schuck, The nuclear many-body problem study on copernicium, Phys. Rev. A 93, 062508 (2016). (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1980). [88] K. V. P. Latha, D. Angom, B. P. Das, and D. Mukherjee, Probing CP violation with the electric dipole moment