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

5.0 KiB
Raw Blame History

title, date, tags, status, aliases, related_notes
title date tags status aliases related_notes
sNME — Small Relativistic Vector NME 2026-05-14
gA/extraction/ssnme
beta-spectrum/forbidden
nuclear-structure/NME
active
small relativistic vector nuclear matrix element
sNME
CVC vector current
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