Role of nuclear and electromagnetic fragmentation in the charge-changing reactions of 18O on carbon and lead targets at around 370 MeV/nucleon
J.R. Liu, B.-H. Sun, J.W. Zhao, G. Guo, G.S. Li, Z.Z. Li, Y.F. Niu, I. Tanihata, S. Terashima, F. Wang, M. Wang, X.L. Wei, J.Y. Xu, J.C. Zhang, L.H. Zhu, L.C. He, C.Y. Liu, C.G. Lu, W.J. Lin, W.P. Lin, Z. Liu, P.P. Ren, Y.Z. Sun, Z.Y. Sun, J. Wang, S.T. Wang, X.D. Xu, M.X. Zhang

TL;DR
This study measures charge-changing cross sections of 18O on various targets at high energies, analyzing the roles of nuclear and electromagnetic interactions, revealing that electromagnetic contributions increase with projectile mass and energy, especially on heavy targets.
Contribution
It provides a detailed evaluation of nuclear and electromagnetic contributions to charge-changing reactions of 18O, including new measurements and analysis across different targets and energies.
Findings
CPE accounts for 12.3% and 5% of CCCSs on C and Pb, respectively.
Electromagnetic excitation contributes less than 1% to CCCSs of 18O.
EM contribution increases with projectile mass and energy, reaching 10% for 197Au on Pb at 900 MeV/nucleon.
Abstract
Charge-changing cross sections (CCCSs) of 18O on carbon (C) and lead (Pb) targets have been measured with an uncertainty of less than 4% at around 370MeV/nucleon. We evaluate the contributions of nucleon-nucleon (NN) and electromagnetic (EM) interactions to CCCSs by considering the direct proton removal process, the charged particle evaporation (CPE) after neutron removal, and the EM excitation. We conclude that the CPE accounts for 12.3% and 5% of CCCSs on C and Pb, respectively. Only less than 1% of CCCSs of 18O is attributed to the EM excitation. Further investigation of projectiles from 18O to 197Au on C, silver (Ag) and Pb targets at 300 and 900MeV/nucleon show that the contribution of EM to CCCSs on Ag and Pb increases with projectile mass numbers and incident energies, and can reach 10% for 197Au on Pb at 900MeV/nucleon. In contrast, the EM contribution to CCCS is negligible for…
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.
