On the Equivalence of Experimental B(E2) Values Determined by Various Techniques

TL;DR

This study statistically analyzes various techniques for measuring B(E2) values, demonstrating their general equivalence and identifying minor discrepancies likely due to specific measurements rather than the methods themselves.

Contribution

It provides a comprehensive statistical validation of the equivalence of different experimental techniques for B(E2) measurements in nuclei.

Findings

Most measurement methods are statistically equivalent.

Weak evidence suggests DSAM may differ from CE and NRF due to specific data discrepancies.

Discrepancies are likely from particular measurements, not the methods generally.

Abstract

We establish the equivalence of the various techniques for measuring B(E2) values using a statistical analysis. Data used in this work come from the re- cent compilation by B. Pritychenko et al., At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 107 (2016). We consider only those nuclei for which the B(E2) values were measured by at least two different methods, with each method being independently performed at least twice. Our results indicate that most prevalent methods of measuring B(E2) values are equivalent, with some weak evidence that Doppler-shift attenuation method (DSAM) measurements may differ from Coulomb excitation (CE) and nuclear resonance fuorescence (NRF) measurements. However, such an evidence appears to arise from discrepant DSAM measurements of the lifetimes for 60Ni and some Sn nuclei rather than a systematic deviation in the method itself.