Dispersive-optical-model analysis of the asymmetry dependence of neutron skins

M. C. Atkinson; R. A. Ramon; W. H. Dickhoff

arxiv: 2607.01599 · v1 · pith:AT52LE7Anew · submitted 2026-07-02 · ⚛️ nucl-th

Dispersive-optical-model analysis of the asymmetry dependence of neutron skins

R. A. Ramon , M. C. Atkinson , W. H. Dickhoff This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-03 04:28 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ nucl-th

keywords neutron skindispersive optical modelnuclear asymmetryneutron drip lineelastic scatteringneutron stars

0 comments

The pith

Neutron skins in nuclei increase stronger than linearly with asymmetry starting from a negative value in calcium-40.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Dispersive optical model analyses of elastic scattering data are performed for 54Fe and 90Zr, with updated results for 40Ca, 48Ca, and 208Pb. The extracted neutron skins begin negative for 40Ca and rise somewhat more steeply than linearly when plotted against the asymmetry parameter (N-Z)/A. This pattern connects to Green's function Monte Carlo calculations for asymmetric helium nuclei and matches the expectation of very large skins in nuclei near the neutron drip line. The work therefore raises the question of which specific nuclei best bridge nuclear structure to neutron star physics.

Core claim

Starting with a negative skin for 40Ca, a trend increasing somewhat stronger than linear emerges when the neutron skin of these nuclei is considered as a function of asymmetry, (N-Z)/A, and linked to the Green's function Monte Carlo results for asymmetric He nuclei. This general trend is consistent with the expectation that nuclei near the neutron drip line are expected to have very large neutron skins. The present analysis therefore motivates the question of which nuclei provide the most relevant link to neutron star physics.

What carries the argument

Dispersive optical model fits to elastic scattering data that extract neutron skins as the difference between neutron and proton radii.

If this is right

Neutron skins become very large in nuclei approaching the neutron drip line.
The asymmetry dependence connects nuclear ground states to properties of neutron-rich matter.
Certain nuclei may serve as better experimental anchors for neutron-star equation-of-state constraints than others.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

If the steeper-than-linear trend holds, models of neutron-rich nuclei could be calibrated more tightly against a few key measurements rather than assuming strict linearity.
The same relation might be tested by extending DOM analyses to additional medium-mass nuclei with known scattering data.
A mismatch between this trend and ab-initio calculations for heavier systems would point to missing physics in the optical-model treatment of asymmetry.

Load-bearing premise

The neutron skins extracted from the dispersive optical model fits to elastic scattering data accurately reflect the true ground-state neutron distributions in these nuclei.

What would settle it

A precise measurement of the neutron skin in 48Ca or 54Fe that falls well below the linear trend extrapolated from the DOM results would contradict the reported asymmetry dependence.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.01599 by M. C. Atkinson, R. A. Ramon, W. H. Dickhoff.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. Ground-state charge and weak charge density dis [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3. Neutron skin as a function of asymmetry, ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

New dispersive optical model analyses of ${}^{54}$Fe and ${}^{90}$Zr together with updated results for ${}^{40}$Ca, ${}^{48}$Ca, and the earlier result for ${}^{208}$Pb shed light on the behavior of neutron skins in nuclei. Starting with a negative skin for ${}^{40}$Ca, a trend increasing somewhat stronger than linear emerges when the neutron skin of these nuclei is considered as a function of asymmetry, $(N-Z)/A$, and linked to the Green's function Monte Carlo results for asymmetric He nuclei. This general trend is consistent with the expectation that nuclei near the neutron drip line are expected to have very large neutron skins. The present analysis therefore motivates the question of which nuclei provide the most relevant link to neutron star physics.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper adds DOM fits for 54Fe and 90Zr that extend an existing asymmetry trend for neutron skins, starting negative in 40Ca and rising to connect with GFMC helium results.

read the letter

The main point is straightforward: new dispersive optical model analyses for 54Fe and 90Zr, plus updates for the calcium isotopes, produce a neutron-skin versus asymmetry plot that begins negative for 40Ca and rises somewhat steeper than linear, then links to the GFMC results on asymmetric helium. That combined trend is the concrete addition here.

The work stays inside the established DOM framework but supplies two fresh nuclei and assembles the full set into one figure. This gives a clearer empirical picture of how skin thickness grows with (N-Z)/A, which lines up with the expectation of large skins near the drip line. The motivation toward neutron-star radius constraints is stated plainly without overclaiming.

The soft spot is the usual one for this method: the skins come from optical-model fits to scattering data, so their accuracy depends on how faithfully those parameters capture the ground-state densities. The paper does not appear to add new cross-checks against other density functionals or ab initio calculations beyond the helium connection, which leaves the trend's robustness tied to the DOM assumptions. No obvious internal inconsistency shows up in the construction of the plot itself.

This is the kind of incremental but data-driven result that people tracking the symmetry energy will want to see. A reader working on empirical anchors for neutron-star models or planning rare-isotope experiments would find the asymmetry figure useful. I would send it to peer review; the central trend is falsifiable against the reported fits and adds specific points worth checking.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports new dispersive optical model (DOM) analyses of elastic scattering data for 54Fe and 90Zr, together with updated DOM results for 40Ca, 48Ca, and 208Pb. Neutron skins extracted from these fits are plotted versus asymmetry (N-Z)/A, revealing a trend that begins with a negative skin in 40Ca and rises somewhat more steeply than linearly; this trend is connected to Green's function Monte Carlo results for asymmetric helium isotopes and is argued to be consistent with expectations for very large skins near the neutron drip line, thereby motivating the identification of nuclei most relevant to neutron-star physics.

Significance. If the extracted skins faithfully represent ground-state densities, the reported asymmetry trend supplies an empirical bridge between light and heavy nuclei that could constrain isovector properties of the nuclear force and the equation of state of neutron-rich matter. The explicit linkage to ab initio GFMC calculations for helium isotopes is a positive feature that allows a direct test of consistency across methods.

minor comments (3)

The abstract and introduction do not quote the numerical skin values, their uncertainties, or the χ^{2} values of the underlying DOM fits; these quantities should be tabulated (e.g., in a new Table 1) so that the claimed trend can be verified quantitatively.
Section 3 (or equivalent) should include a direct comparison of the DOM skins with at least one independent extraction method (e.g., parity-violating electron scattering or ab initio calculations) for the same nuclei to substantiate the weakest assumption identified in the review.
The statement that the trend is 'somewhat stronger than linear' is not accompanied by a quantitative measure (slope, χ^{2} of linear vs. quadratic fit, or similar); adding such a metric would strengthen the claim.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive assessment of our manuscript, the recognition of its significance in bridging light and heavy nuclei, and the recommendation for minor revision. No specific major comments were raised in the report.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity

full rationale

The paper performs independent DOM fits to elastic scattering data for multiple nuclei (40Ca, 48Ca, 54Fe, 90Zr, 208Pb), extracts neutron skins as outputs of those fits, and then plots the resulting skins against asymmetry (N-Z)/A to observe an empirical trend. This trend is compared to external GFMC results for He isotopes. No equation or step reduces a claimed prediction to a fitted input by construction, no self-citation supplies a load-bearing uniqueness theorem, and no ansatz is smuggled in. The central result is an observational pattern from separate analyses, not a derived quantity forced by the paper's own inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract is available; no information on free parameters, axioms, or invented entities can be extracted from the provided text.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5665 in / 1009 out tokens · 28412 ms · 2026-07-03T04:28:47.157571+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references

[1]

M. C. Atkinson, W. H. Dickhoff, M. Piarulli, A. Rios, and R. B. Wiringa, Phys. Rev. C102, 044333 (2020)

2020
[2]

Typel and B

S. Typel and B. A. Brown, Phys. Rev. C64, 027302 (2001)

2001
[3]

Furnstahl and H.-W

R. Furnstahl and H.-W. Hammer, Phys. Lett. B531, 203 (2002)

2002
[4]

A. W. Steiner, M. Prakash, J. M. Lattimer, and P. J. Ellis, Phys. Rep.411, 325 (2005)

2005
[5]

Roca-Maza, M

X. Roca-Maza, M. Centelles, X. Vi˜ nas, and M. Warda, Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 252501 (2011)

2011
[6]

Li, L.-W

B.-A. Li, L.-W. Chen, and C. M. Ko, Phys. Rep.464, 113 (2008)

2008
[7]

C. J. Horowitz and J. Piekarewicz, Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 5647 (2001)

2001
[8]

A. W. Steiner, J. M. Lattimer, and E. F. Brown, Astro- phys. J.722, 33 (2010)

2010
[9]

M. B. Tsang, J. R. Stone, F. Camera, P. Danielewicz, S. Gandolfi, K. Hebeler, C. J. Horowitz, J. Lee, W. G. Lynch, Z. Kohley, R. Lemmon, P. M¨ oller, T. Murakami, S. Riordan, X. Roca-Maza, F. Sammarruca, A. W. Steiner, I. Vida˜ na, and S. J. Yennello, Phys. Rev. C 86, 015803 (2012)

2012
[10]

J. M. Mammei, C. J. Horowitz, J. Piekarewicz, B. T. Reed, and C. Sfienti, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.74, 321 (2024)

2024
[11]

Angeli and K

I. Angeli and K. P. Marinova, At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 99, 69 (2013)

2013
[12]

R. F. Garcia Ruiz, M. Bissell, K. Blaum, A. Ekstr¨ om, N. Fr¨ ommgen, G. Hagen, M. Hammen, K. Hebeler, J. Holt, G. Jansen,et al., Nat. Phys.12, 594 (2016)

2016
[13]

Piekarewicz and S

J. Piekarewicz and S. P. Weppner, Nucl. Phys. A778, 10 (2006). 5

2006
[14]

Abrahamyanet al.(PREX Collaboration), Phys

S. Abrahamyanet al.(PREX Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 112502 (2012)

2012
[15]

Adhikari, H

D. Adhikari, H. Albataineh, D. Androic, K. Aniol, D. S. Armstrong, T. Averett, C. Ayerbe Gayoso, S. Barcus, V. Bellini, R. S. Beminiwattha,et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 172502 (2021)

2021
[16]

Adhikari, H

D. Adhikari, H. Albataineh, D. Androic, K. A. Aniol, D. S. Armstrong, T. Averett, C. Ayerbe Gayoso, S. K. Barcus, V. Bellini, R. S. Beminiwattha,et al., Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 042501 (2022)

2022
[17]

T. W. Donnelly, J. Dubach, and I. Sick, Nucl. Phys. A 503, 589 (1989)

1989
[18]

Trzci´ nska, J

A. Trzci´ nska, J. Jastrz¸ ebski, P. Lubi´ nski, F. J. Hartmann, R. Schmidt, T. Von Egidy, and B. K los, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 082501 (2001)

2001
[19]

Jastrz¸ ebski, A

J. Jastrz¸ ebski, A. Trzci´ nska, P. Lubi´ nski, B. K los, F. J. Hartmann, T. Von Egidy, and S. Wycech, Int. J. of Mod. Phys. E13, 343 (2004)

2004
[20]

S. J. Novario, D. Lonardoni, S. Gandolfi, and G. Hagen, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 032501 (2023)

2023
[21]

J. T. Zhang, X. L. Tu, P. Sarriguren, K. Yue, Q. Zeng, Z. Y. Sun, M. Wang, Y. H. Zhang, X. H. Zhou, and Y. A. Litvinov, Phys. Rev. C104, 034303 (2021)

2021
[22]

National Nuclear Data Center, Brookhaven National Laboratory,https://www.nndc.bnl.gov/(accessed June, 2026)

2026
[23]

Ozawa, T

A. Ozawa, T. Suzuki, and I. Tanihata, Nucl. Phys. A 693, 32 (2001)

2001
[24]

M. H. Mahzoon, R. J. Charity, W. H. Dickhoff, H. Dus- san, and S. J. Waldecker, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 162503 (2014)

2014
[25]

N. L. Calleya, M. C. Atkinson, and W. H. Dickhoff, Phys. Lett. B863, 139371 (2025)

2025
[26]

M. C. Atkinson, M. H. Mahzoon, M. A. Keim, B. A. Bor- delon, C. D. Pruitt, R. J. Charity, and W. H. Dickhoff, Phys. Rev. C101, 044303 (2020)

2020
[27]

Application of the dispersive optical model to the semi- magic nucleus 90Zr,

R. A. Ramon, M. C. Atkinson, and W. H. Dickhoff, “Application of the dispersive optical model to the semi- magic nucleus 90Zr,” in preparation (2026)

2026
[28]

Carlson, S

J. Carlson, S. Gandolfi, F. Pederiva, S. C. Pieper, R. Schi- avilla, K. E. Schmidt, and R. B. Wiringa, Rev. Mod. Phys.87, 1067 (2015)

2015
[29]

Reinhard, X

P.-G. Reinhard, X. Roca-Maza, and W. Nazarewicz, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 232501 (2022)

2022
[30]

Hagen, A

G. Hagen, A. Ekstr¨ om, C. Forss´ en, G. R. Jansen, W. Nazarewicz, T. Papenbrock, K. A. Wendt, S. Bacca, N. Barnea, B. Carlsson,et al., Nat. Phys.12, 186 (2016)

2016
[31]

B. Hu, W. Jiang, T. Miyagi, Z. Sun, A. Ekstr¨ om, C. Forss´ en, G. Hagen, J. D. Holt, T. Papenbrock, S. R. Stroberg,et al., Nat. Phys.18, 1196 (2022)

2022
[32]

B. Hu, W. Jiang, T. Miyagi, Z. Sun, A. Ekstr¨ om, C. Forss´ en, G. Hagen, J. D. Holt, T. Papenbrock, S. R. Stroberg,et al., Nat. Phys.20, 169 (2024)

2024
[33]

Dussan, M

H. Dussan, M. H. Mahzoon, R. J. Charity, W. H. Dick- hoff, and A. Polls, Phys. Rev. C90, 061603 (2014)

2014
[34]

W. H. Dickhoff and D. Van Neck,Many-Body Theory Ex- posed!, 3rd edition(World Scientific, New Jersey, 2026)

2026
[35]

M. C. Atkinson, H. P. Blok, L. Lapik´ as, R. J. Charity, and W. H. Dickhoff, Phys. Rev. C98, 044627 (2018)

2018
[36]

M. C. Atkinson and W. H. Dickhoff, Phys. Lett. B798, 135027 (2019)

2019
[37]

Mahaux and R

C. Mahaux and R. Sartor, Adv. Nucl. Phys.20, 1 (1991)

1991
[38]

W. H. Dickhoff, R. J. Charity, and M. H. Mahzoon, J. of Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys.44, 033001 (2017)

2017
[39]

W. H. Dickhoff and R. J. Charity, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 105, 252 (2019)

2019
[40]

W. H. Dickhoff, D. Van Neck, S. J. Waldecker, R. J. Charity, and L. G. Sobotka, Phys. Rev. C82, 054306 (2010)

2010
[41]

S. J. Waldecker, C. Barbieri, and W. H. Dickhoff, Phys. Rev. C84, 034616 (2011)

2011
[42]

Dussan, S

H. Dussan, S. J. Waldecker, W. H. Dickhoff, H. M¨ uther, and A. Polls, Phys. Rev. C84, 044319 (2011)

2011
[43]

Descouvemont and D

P. Descouvemont and D. Baye, Rep. Prog. Phys.73, 036301 (2010)

2010
[44]

Baye, Phys

D. Baye, Phys. Rep.565, 1 (2015)

2015
[45]

R. Pohl, A. Antognini, F. Nez, F. D. Amaro, F. Biraben, J. M. Cardoso, D. S. Covita, A. Dax, S. Dhawan, L. M. P. Fernandes,et al., Nature466, 213 (2010)

2010
[46]

A. A. Filin, V. Baru, E. Epelbaum, H. Krebs, D. M¨ oller, and P. Reinert, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 082501 (2020)

2020
[47]

C. J. Horowitz and J. Piekarewicz, Phys. Rev. C86, 045503 (2012)

2012
[48]

Extension of the dispersive optical model to describe high-momentum components,

R. A. Ramon, M. C. Atkinson, and W. H. Dickhoff, “Extension of the dispersive optical model to describe high-momentum components,” in preparation (2026)

2026
[49]

Dispersive optical model description of the CaFe exper- iment,

R. A. Ramon, M. C. Atkinson, and W. H. Dickhoff, “Dispersive optical model description of the CaFe exper- iment,” in preparation (2026)

2026
[50]

Nguyen, C

D. Nguyen, C. Yero, H. Szumila-Vance,et al., Nature 654, 619 (2026)

2026
[51]

J. W. A. den Herder, H. P. Blok, E. Jans, P. H. M. Keizer, L. Lapik´ as, E. N. M. Quint, G. van der Steenhoven, and P. K. A. de Witt Huberts, Nucl. Phys. A490, 507 (1988)

1988
[52]

de Vries, C

H. de Vries, C. W. de Jager, and C. de Vries, At. Data Nucl. Data Tables36, 495 (1987)

1987
[53]

M. H. Mahzoon, M. C. Atkinson, R. J. Charity, and W. H. Dickhoff, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 222503 (2017)

2017
[54]

Piarulli, A

M. Piarulli, A. Baroni, L. Girlanda, A. Kievsky, A. Lo- vato, E. Lusk, L. E. Marcucci, S. C. Pieper, R. Schiavilla, M. Viviani, and R. B. Wiringa, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 052503 (2018)

2018
[55]

Piarulli, (2026), private communication

M. Piarulli, (2026), private communication

2026
[56]

Mueller, I

P. Mueller, I. A. Sulai, A. C. C. Villari, J. A. Alc´ antara- N´ u˜ nez, R. Alves-Cond´ e, K. Bailey, G. W. F. Drake, M. Dubois, C. El´ eon, G. Gaubert, R. J. Holt, R. V. F. Janssens, N. Lecesne, Z.-T. Lu, T. P. O’Connor, M.-G. Saint-Laurent, J.-C. Thomas, and L.-B. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett.99, 252501 (2007)

2007

[1] [1]

M. C. Atkinson, W. H. Dickhoff, M. Piarulli, A. Rios, and R. B. Wiringa, Phys. Rev. C102, 044333 (2020)

2020

[2] [2]

Typel and B

S. Typel and B. A. Brown, Phys. Rev. C64, 027302 (2001)

2001

[3] [3]

Furnstahl and H.-W

R. Furnstahl and H.-W. Hammer, Phys. Lett. B531, 203 (2002)

2002

[4] [4]

A. W. Steiner, M. Prakash, J. M. Lattimer, and P. J. Ellis, Phys. Rep.411, 325 (2005)

2005

[5] [5]

Roca-Maza, M

X. Roca-Maza, M. Centelles, X. Vi˜ nas, and M. Warda, Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 252501 (2011)

2011

[6] [6]

Li, L.-W

B.-A. Li, L.-W. Chen, and C. M. Ko, Phys. Rep.464, 113 (2008)

2008

[7] [7]

C. J. Horowitz and J. Piekarewicz, Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 5647 (2001)

2001

[8] [8]

A. W. Steiner, J. M. Lattimer, and E. F. Brown, Astro- phys. J.722, 33 (2010)

2010

[9] [9]

M. B. Tsang, J. R. Stone, F. Camera, P. Danielewicz, S. Gandolfi, K. Hebeler, C. J. Horowitz, J. Lee, W. G. Lynch, Z. Kohley, R. Lemmon, P. M¨ oller, T. Murakami, S. Riordan, X. Roca-Maza, F. Sammarruca, A. W. Steiner, I. Vida˜ na, and S. J. Yennello, Phys. Rev. C 86, 015803 (2012)

2012

[10] [10]

J. M. Mammei, C. J. Horowitz, J. Piekarewicz, B. T. Reed, and C. Sfienti, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.74, 321 (2024)

2024

[11] [11]

Angeli and K

I. Angeli and K. P. Marinova, At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 99, 69 (2013)

2013

[12] [12]

R. F. Garcia Ruiz, M. Bissell, K. Blaum, A. Ekstr¨ om, N. Fr¨ ommgen, G. Hagen, M. Hammen, K. Hebeler, J. Holt, G. Jansen,et al., Nat. Phys.12, 594 (2016)

2016

[13] [13]

Piekarewicz and S

J. Piekarewicz and S. P. Weppner, Nucl. Phys. A778, 10 (2006). 5

2006

[14] [14]

Abrahamyanet al.(PREX Collaboration), Phys

S. Abrahamyanet al.(PREX Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 112502 (2012)

2012

[15] [15]

Adhikari, H

D. Adhikari, H. Albataineh, D. Androic, K. Aniol, D. S. Armstrong, T. Averett, C. Ayerbe Gayoso, S. Barcus, V. Bellini, R. S. Beminiwattha,et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 172502 (2021)

2021

[16] [16]

Adhikari, H

D. Adhikari, H. Albataineh, D. Androic, K. A. Aniol, D. S. Armstrong, T. Averett, C. Ayerbe Gayoso, S. K. Barcus, V. Bellini, R. S. Beminiwattha,et al., Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 042501 (2022)

2022

[17] [17]

T. W. Donnelly, J. Dubach, and I. Sick, Nucl. Phys. A 503, 589 (1989)

1989

[18] [18]

Trzci´ nska, J

A. Trzci´ nska, J. Jastrz¸ ebski, P. Lubi´ nski, F. J. Hartmann, R. Schmidt, T. Von Egidy, and B. K los, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 082501 (2001)

2001

[19] [19]

Jastrz¸ ebski, A

J. Jastrz¸ ebski, A. Trzci´ nska, P. Lubi´ nski, B. K los, F. J. Hartmann, T. Von Egidy, and S. Wycech, Int. J. of Mod. Phys. E13, 343 (2004)

2004

[20] [20]

S. J. Novario, D. Lonardoni, S. Gandolfi, and G. Hagen, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 032501 (2023)

2023

[21] [21]

J. T. Zhang, X. L. Tu, P. Sarriguren, K. Yue, Q. Zeng, Z. Y. Sun, M. Wang, Y. H. Zhang, X. H. Zhou, and Y. A. Litvinov, Phys. Rev. C104, 034303 (2021)

2021

[22] [22]

National Nuclear Data Center, Brookhaven National Laboratory,https://www.nndc.bnl.gov/(accessed June, 2026)

2026

[23] [23]

Ozawa, T

A. Ozawa, T. Suzuki, and I. Tanihata, Nucl. Phys. A 693, 32 (2001)

2001

[24] [24]

M. H. Mahzoon, R. J. Charity, W. H. Dickhoff, H. Dus- san, and S. J. Waldecker, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 162503 (2014)

2014

[25] [25]

N. L. Calleya, M. C. Atkinson, and W. H. Dickhoff, Phys. Lett. B863, 139371 (2025)

2025

[26] [26]

M. C. Atkinson, M. H. Mahzoon, M. A. Keim, B. A. Bor- delon, C. D. Pruitt, R. J. Charity, and W. H. Dickhoff, Phys. Rev. C101, 044303 (2020)

2020

[27] [27]

Application of the dispersive optical model to the semi- magic nucleus 90Zr,

R. A. Ramon, M. C. Atkinson, and W. H. Dickhoff, “Application of the dispersive optical model to the semi- magic nucleus 90Zr,” in preparation (2026)

2026

[28] [28]

Carlson, S

J. Carlson, S. Gandolfi, F. Pederiva, S. C. Pieper, R. Schi- avilla, K. E. Schmidt, and R. B. Wiringa, Rev. Mod. Phys.87, 1067 (2015)

2015

[29] [29]

Reinhard, X

P.-G. Reinhard, X. Roca-Maza, and W. Nazarewicz, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 232501 (2022)

2022

[30] [30]

Hagen, A

G. Hagen, A. Ekstr¨ om, C. Forss´ en, G. R. Jansen, W. Nazarewicz, T. Papenbrock, K. A. Wendt, S. Bacca, N. Barnea, B. Carlsson,et al., Nat. Phys.12, 186 (2016)

2016

[31] [31]

B. Hu, W. Jiang, T. Miyagi, Z. Sun, A. Ekstr¨ om, C. Forss´ en, G. Hagen, J. D. Holt, T. Papenbrock, S. R. Stroberg,et al., Nat. Phys.18, 1196 (2022)

2022

[32] [32]

B. Hu, W. Jiang, T. Miyagi, Z. Sun, A. Ekstr¨ om, C. Forss´ en, G. Hagen, J. D. Holt, T. Papenbrock, S. R. Stroberg,et al., Nat. Phys.20, 169 (2024)

2024

[33] [33]

Dussan, M

H. Dussan, M. H. Mahzoon, R. J. Charity, W. H. Dick- hoff, and A. Polls, Phys. Rev. C90, 061603 (2014)

2014

[34] [34]

W. H. Dickhoff and D. Van Neck,Many-Body Theory Ex- posed!, 3rd edition(World Scientific, New Jersey, 2026)

2026

[35] [35]

M. C. Atkinson, H. P. Blok, L. Lapik´ as, R. J. Charity, and W. H. Dickhoff, Phys. Rev. C98, 044627 (2018)

2018

[36] [36]

M. C. Atkinson and W. H. Dickhoff, Phys. Lett. B798, 135027 (2019)

2019

[37] [37]

Mahaux and R

C. Mahaux and R. Sartor, Adv. Nucl. Phys.20, 1 (1991)

1991

[38] [38]

W. H. Dickhoff, R. J. Charity, and M. H. Mahzoon, J. of Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys.44, 033001 (2017)

2017

[39] [39]

W. H. Dickhoff and R. J. Charity, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 105, 252 (2019)

2019

[40] [40]

W. H. Dickhoff, D. Van Neck, S. J. Waldecker, R. J. Charity, and L. G. Sobotka, Phys. Rev. C82, 054306 (2010)

2010

[41] [41]

S. J. Waldecker, C. Barbieri, and W. H. Dickhoff, Phys. Rev. C84, 034616 (2011)

2011

[42] [42]

Dussan, S

H. Dussan, S. J. Waldecker, W. H. Dickhoff, H. M¨ uther, and A. Polls, Phys. Rev. C84, 044319 (2011)

2011

[43] [43]

Descouvemont and D

P. Descouvemont and D. Baye, Rep. Prog. Phys.73, 036301 (2010)

2010

[44] [44]

Baye, Phys

D. Baye, Phys. Rep.565, 1 (2015)

2015

[45] [45]

R. Pohl, A. Antognini, F. Nez, F. D. Amaro, F. Biraben, J. M. Cardoso, D. S. Covita, A. Dax, S. Dhawan, L. M. P. Fernandes,et al., Nature466, 213 (2010)

2010

[46] [46]

A. A. Filin, V. Baru, E. Epelbaum, H. Krebs, D. M¨ oller, and P. Reinert, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 082501 (2020)

2020

[47] [47]

C. J. Horowitz and J. Piekarewicz, Phys. Rev. C86, 045503 (2012)

2012

[48] [48]

Extension of the dispersive optical model to describe high-momentum components,

R. A. Ramon, M. C. Atkinson, and W. H. Dickhoff, “Extension of the dispersive optical model to describe high-momentum components,” in preparation (2026)

2026

[49] [49]

Dispersive optical model description of the CaFe exper- iment,

R. A. Ramon, M. C. Atkinson, and W. H. Dickhoff, “Dispersive optical model description of the CaFe exper- iment,” in preparation (2026)

2026

[50] [50]

Nguyen, C

D. Nguyen, C. Yero, H. Szumila-Vance,et al., Nature 654, 619 (2026)

2026

[51] [51]

J. W. A. den Herder, H. P. Blok, E. Jans, P. H. M. Keizer, L. Lapik´ as, E. N. M. Quint, G. van der Steenhoven, and P. K. A. de Witt Huberts, Nucl. Phys. A490, 507 (1988)

1988

[52] [52]

de Vries, C

H. de Vries, C. W. de Jager, and C. de Vries, At. Data Nucl. Data Tables36, 495 (1987)

1987

[53] [53]

M. H. Mahzoon, M. C. Atkinson, R. J. Charity, and W. H. Dickhoff, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 222503 (2017)

2017

[54] [54]

Piarulli, A

M. Piarulli, A. Baroni, L. Girlanda, A. Kievsky, A. Lo- vato, E. Lusk, L. E. Marcucci, S. C. Pieper, R. Schiavilla, M. Viviani, and R. B. Wiringa, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 052503 (2018)

2018

[55] [55]

Piarulli, (2026), private communication

M. Piarulli, (2026), private communication

2026

[56] [56]

Mueller, I

P. Mueller, I. A. Sulai, A. C. C. Villari, J. A. Alc´ antara- N´ u˜ nez, R. Alves-Cond´ e, K. Bailey, G. W. F. Drake, M. Dubois, C. El´ eon, G. Gaubert, R. J. Holt, R. V. F. Janssens, N. Lecesne, Z.-T. Lu, T. P. O’Connor, M.-G. Saint-Laurent, J.-C. Thomas, and L.-B. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett.99, 252501 (2007)

2007