Assessing the foundation of the Trojan Horse Method
C.A. Bertulani, M.S. Hussein, S. Typel
TL;DR
This paper examines the theoretical foundation of the Trojan Horse Method within the INEB framework, clarifying its relation to direct and two-step processes and connecting it to the Surrogate Method.
Contribution
It provides a theoretical analysis showing how the THM relates to INEB and DWBA, and clarifies its connection to the Surrogate Method.
Findings
The direct part of INEB cross section resembles the one-step THM cross section.
The THM is connected to the Surrogate Method as a two-step process.
The paper clarifies the theoretical basis of the Trojan Horse Method.
Abstract
We discuss the foundation of the Trojan Horse Method (THM) within the Inclusive Non-Elastic Breakup (INEB) theory. We demonstrate that the direct part of the INEB cross section, which is of two-step character, becomes, in the DWBA limit of the three-body theory with appropriate approximations and redefinitions, similar in structure to the one-step THM cross section. We also discuss the connection of the THM to the Surrogate Method (SM), which is a genuine two-step process.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.