Files
beta_shape_pnpi/docs/gA-extraction/02-ssnme.md
T
unzhakov 030ae3e4b9 docs: restructure knowledge base into tree layout + gA extraction module
- Organize into tree structure: corrections/, nuclear-structure/, gA-extraction/, refs/
- Move all correction notes to corrections/ (01-09)
- Move nuclear structure to nuclear-structure/ with index
- Add gA-extraction/ with SSM algorithm, sNME/ESSM formalism, Tc99 case study, and implementation TODO
- Reorganize refs by topic (electromagnetic/, forbidden-decay/)
- Update all wikilinks to new paths
- Remove radiative_spec.md (code algorithm, not reference)
- Lint: all wikilinks verified valid
- Comprehensive gA extraction research based on Paulsen et al. (2024) and Song et al. (2025)
2026-05-14 19:46:39 +03:00

107 lines
5.0 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters
This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
---
title: "sNME — Small Relativistic Vector NME"
date: 2026-05-14
tags:
- gA/extraction/ssnme
- beta-spectrum/forbidden
- nuclear-structure/NME
status: active
aliases: [small relativistic vector nuclear matrix element, sNME, CVC vector current]
related_notes:
- gA-extraction/01-ssm-algorithm
- gA-extraction/03-tc99-case-study
- nuclear-structure/01-shape-factors
---
# The Small Relativistic Vector NME (sNME) — Why It Matters
## What is the sNME?
In forbidden β decay, the relativistic vector current has two components:
- **Large NME (l-NME):** Computed from the large components of nucleon wave functions. Reliably calculable in NSM.
- **Small NME (sNME):** Couples the large and small components. **Extremely difficult** to compute because it involves contributions outside the valence shell.
In a perfect many-body theory with infinite valence space, the sNME is related to the l-NME by the **CVC hypothesis**:
$$\text{sNME} = \frac{1}{2} \left[ W_0 - (m_n - m_p) + E_C \right] \cdot \text{l-NME} \tag{1}$$
where:
- $W_0$ — endpoint energy in MeV
- $m_n - m_p \approx 1.293$ MeV — neutron-proton mass difference
- $E_C$ — Coulomb displacement energy (depends on nuclear charge distribution)
- l-NME — large vector NME (computable in NSM)
### Why is sNME important?
Despite being "small" (typically $< 0.1$ in absolute units), the sNME can influence β-spectral shapes and half-lives **quite strongly** because:
1. **Quadratic dependence:** The half-life $t_{1/2} \propto 1/(\text{l-NME} + \text{sNME})^2$, so even a small sNME shifts the total matrix element significantly.
2. **Small Q-value amplification:** For $^{99}\text{Tc}$, $[W_0 - (m_n - m_p)] = -0.487$ MeV — the negative mass difference nearly cancels the endpoint energy, making the sNME contribution relatively large.
3. **Shape dependence:** Different sNME values produce measurably different spectral shapes, especially below 100 keV.
## The CVC Value — An Idealization
The CVC prediction (Eq. 1) is an **idealization** — it pertains to a perfect many-body theory. In practice:
- NSM calculations with finite valence spaces give sNME $\approx 0$ (the valence space truncation kills it)
- The CVC value serves as a **reference**, not a physical prediction
## ESSM: sNME as a Fitting Parameter
### The Enhanced Spectrum Shape Method (ESSM)
Kumar et al. (2021) proposed using the sNME as an additional fitting parameter:
1. **Fix** $g_A$ at a trial value
2. **Vary** the sNME to match the **experimental partial half-life**
3. Because $t_{1/2} \propto (\text{l-NME} + \text{sNME})^{-2}$, the equation $t_{1/2}^{\text{theo}}(g_A, \text{sNME}) = t_{1/2}^{\text{exp}}$ typically yields **two solutions** for the sNME:
- **sNME(c):** closer to the CVC value
- **sNME(f):** further from the CVC value
### Two-Solution Structure
For each $g_A$ value, there are two sNME solutions (or none, if the experimental half-life cannot be reproduced). This creates two distinct spectral shape predictions:
- The **sNME(c)** solution is theoretically preferred (closer to CVC)
- The **sNME(f)** solution may also be physical — only experiment can decide
### Application to $^{99}\text{Tc}$
Song et al. (2025) applied ESSM to $^{99}\text{Tc}$ with three nuclear models:
| Model | $g_A^{\text{eff}}$ | sNME (c) [fm³] | sNME (f) [fm³] | $\chi^2_\nu$ | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| **CloseCVC (CVC fixed)** | 1.1 | 0.0674 | — | 1.106 | 0.12 |
| | 1.0 | 0.0681 | — | 1.244 | 0.004 |
| | 1.0 | 0.0651 | — | 1.644 | <0.0001 |
| **FarCVC (sNME fitted)** | 1.2 | −0.0698 | — | 1.066 | 0.22 |
| | 1.0 | −0.0669 | — | 1.097 | 0.14 |
| | 1.0 | −0.0683 | — | 1.095 | 0.14 |
Key findings:
- **Paulsen et al. (CloseCVC):** $g_A^{\text{eff}} = 1.526(92)$ — enhanced value
- **Song et al. (FarCVC/ESSM):** $g_A^{\text{eff}} \approx 1.0$–1.2 — quenched value
- The discrepancy arises from the **sNME treatment**, not from the data
## sNME in Other Transitions
Ramalho & Suhonen (2024) studied five second-forbidden nonunique decays:
| Transition | $g_A$ Sensitivity | sNME Sensitivity |
|---|---|---|
| $^{60}\text{Fe} \to {}^{60}\text{Co}$ | Strong | Weak |
| $^{94}\text{Nb} \to {}^{94}\text{Mo}$ | Strong (jj45pnb) | Weak |
| $^{98}\text{Tc} \to {}^{98}\text{Ru}$ | Strong | Moderate (below 100 keV) |
| $^{126}\text{Sn} \to {}^{126}\text{Sb}$ | Weak | **Strong** |
| $^{129}\text{I} \to {}^{129}\text{Xe}$ | Weak | **Strong** |
For $^{99}\text{Tc}$, the $g_A$ sensitivity is **strong** and the sNME sensitivity is **moderate** — making it an excellent candidate for combined $g_A$ + sNME fitting.
## References
| Ref | Citation | Use |
|---|---|---|
| [ESSM] | Kumar, Srivastava, Suhonen, *Eur. Phys. J. A* **57**, 225 (2021) | ESSM formalism |
| [Song2025] | Song et al., arXiv:2506.17544 (2025) | $^{99}$Tc with ESSM |
| [Ramalho2024] | Ramalho, Suhonen, *Front. Phys.* **12**, 1455778 (2024) | sNME in five second-forbidden decays |
| [Behrens] | Behrens & Bühring, *Electron Radial Wave Functions and Nuclear Beta Decay* (1982) | sNME formalism |