Energy systematics of heavy nuclei -- mean field models in comparison

TL;DR

This paper compares different mean-field models for predicting binding energies of heavy nuclei, highlighting differences and improvements in model accuracy for super-heavy elements.

Contribution

It provides a systematic comparison of standard and extended relativistic mean-field models with Skyrme Hartree-Fock models for super-heavy nuclei.

Findings

SHF models tend to underbind super-heavy nuclei

RMF models tend to overbind super-heavy nuclei

Extended RMF models improve prediction accuracy

Abstract

We compare the systematics of binding energies computed within the standard and extended versions of the relativistic mean-field (RMF) model and the Skyrme Hartree-Fock (SHF) model. The general trends for the binding energies for super-heavy nuclei are significantly different for these models. The SHF models tend to underbind the superheavy nuclei, while, RMF models show just the opposite trend. The extended RMF model seems to provide remarkable improvements over the results obtained for the standard RMF model.