PHYSICAL REVIEW C 102, 024302 (2020)

Mass relations of mirror nuclei

Y. Y. Zong ,1 C. Ma,1 Y. M. Zhao,1,2,* and A. Arima 1,3

1
Shanghai Key Laboratory of Particle Physics and Cosmology, School of Physics and Astronomy, Shanghai Jiao Tong University,
Shanghai 200240, China
2
Collaborative Innovation Center of IFSA (CICIFSA), Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China
3
Musashi Gakuen, 1-26-1 Toyotamakami Nerima-ku, Tokyo 176-8533, Japan

(Received 5 February 2020; revised 4 May 2020; accepted 15 July 2020; published 3 August 2020)

In this paper we revisit mass relations of mirror nuclei by considering the odd-even feature in Coulomb
energy. A substantial improvement and competitive accuracy of mass relations is achieved, with root-mean-
squared deviations (RMSD) of only 93 keV; for the first time one is able to construct simple mass formulas for
mirror nuclei with the RMSD below 100 keV in light- and medium-mass regions (mass number A = 20–90)
by using only four parameters. As a by-product we tabulate our predictions of masses excesses unaccessible
experimentally in the Supplemental Material of this paper.

DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevC.102.024302

Nuclear mass M, neutron separation energy Sn , and pro- Simple mass formulas for mirror nuclei are constructed with
ton separation energy S p are fundamental quantities in nu- the RMSD 93 keV for nuclei mass number A between 20 to
clear physics and astrophysics [throughout this paper we use 90, with a total of four parameters.
M(N, Z ) to denote the mass of nucleus with neutron number Let us begin with the simple Weizsäcker formula, viz.,
N and proton number Z]. There are many theoretical models
M(N, Z ) ≡ NMn + ZM p − B(N, Z )
and methods to describe the atomic-mass evaluation database
and to predict unknown masses [1,2]. Here we mention a few = NMn + ZM p − av A + as A2/3 + ac Z 2 A−1/3
theoretical models, such as the Duflo-Zuker model [3], the
finite-range droplet model (FRDM) [4,5], the Skyrme Hartree- + aa (N − Z )2 A−1 − δpair , (1)
Fock-Bogoliubov theory [6], and Weizsäcker-Skyrme (WS) where A = N + Z, Mn , and M p represent masses of a free
model [7,8]. From another perspective, various mass relations neutron and a free proton, respectively; av , as , ac , aa are
have been proved to be useful in local mass regions, such as the volume term, surface term, Coulomb term, and symmetry
the Audi-Wapstra extrapolation method [9–11], the Garvey- term coefficient, respectively (here we use the convention that
Kelson mass relations [12,13], the mass relations based on Coulomb energy, surface energy, and symmetry energy are
neutron-proton interactions [14,15], and mass relations asso- positive, and the volume energy and the pairing term δpair
ciated with mirror nuclei [16,17]. are negative). From the above Weizsäcker formula, one easily
The mass relations of mirror nuclei are based on the isospin derives a simple formula of mass differences between two
symmetry of interactions between nucleons. The empirical corresponding mirror nuclei with neutron and proton numbers
neutron-proton interaction of mirror nuclei was studied many (N, Z ) = (K − k, K ) and (K, K − k) as follows [16]:
years ago, with the focus of the isospin symmetry conser-
m (K − k, K ) ≡ M(K − k, K ) − M(K, K − k)
vation [18,19]. This symmetry was exemplified recently by
Zhang et al. [20] by the latest mass measurements. A num- = ac kA2/3 + k(M p − Mn ) , (2)
ber of generalized Garvey-Kelson mass relations of mirror
where A = 2K − k is the mass number of corresponding
nuclei were constructed by Tian et al., with the resultant
mirror nuclei. In the above formula, the first term results
root-mean-square deviation (RMSD) being 0.398 MeV for
from the Coulomb energy difference between mirror nuclei,
31 proton-rich nuclei [21]. By using an empirical Coulomb
and the second term correspond to the proton-neutron mass
energy and phenomenological shell corrections, a number of
difference. We note that the parameter (M p − Mn ) should be
simple relations between two mirror nuclei were constructed
close to the mass difference of a free proton and a free neutron
in Ref. [16], with the RMSD from 120 to 290 keV. The idea of
but meanwhile subtracted by the mass of an electron (i.e.,
Ref. [16] was further exploited by replacing mass differences
1.293–0.511 MeV = 0.782 MeV), if one adopts the mass
by one-nucleon separation energies of two corresponding mir-
database from the atomic mass evaluation (AME) in calcu-
ror nuclei in Ref. [17], where the RMSD were reduced to 110–
lations, and this is the case in this paper. We also note here
130 keV. In this paper we revisit mass relations of Ref. [17] by
that if one further considers the parity of neutrons and protons
further considering the odd-even feature in Coulomb energy.
of δpair in the Weizsäcker formula, then the mass formulas of
Ref. [16] are improved: Our present numerical experiments
by using the AME2016 database show that, for an even value
*
Corresponding author: [email protected] of k (k = 2, 4, i.e., proton number and neutron numbers of

2469-9985/2020/102(2)/024302(5) 024302-1 ©2020 American Physical Society

ZONG, MA, ZHAO, AND ARIMA PHYSICAL REVIEW C 102, 024302 (2020)

the mirror nuclei have the same parity), the improvement by

discriminating the parity of k is relatively small (the RMSD
value is reduced by about 20 keV), while for an odd value of
k (i.e., k = 1 and 3, in these cases the parity of K − k and that
of K are different), the reduction of the RMSD value is large
(by about 90 keV).
In this paper we report an odd-even staggering for devia-
tions of the formulas in Ref. [17] from experimental values
and make use of this feature to improve our mass formulas.
According to Eqs. (15) and (16) in Ref. [17],
n (K − k, K ) ≡ M(K − 1 − k, K ) − M(K − k, K )
− M(K, K − k − 1) + M(K, K − k)
= ac δcn + (M p − Mn ) = ac δcn − C, (3)
 p (K − k, K ) ≡ M(K − k, K − 1) − M(K − k, K )
− M(K − 1, K − k) + M(K, K − k)
= ac δcp + (Mn − M p ) = ac δcp + C, (4)
where n is the difference of one-neutron separation en-
ergy between the nucleus with (N, Z ) = (K − k, K ) and
one-proton separation energy of the nucleus with (N, Z ) =
(K, K − k), and  p is the difference of one-proton sepa-
ration energy of the nucleus with (N, Z ) = (K − k, K ) and
FIG. 1. Deviations (in unit of MeV) of theoretical values of
one-neutron separation energy of the nucleus with (N, Z ) =
mirror nuclei mass relations, i.e., Eqs. (3) and (4), from experimental
(K, K − k). δcn and δcp is given by the simple Coulomb-energy
data in the AME2016 [11] for 10  Z, N  40. Solid squares in
term in Eq. (1). According to Eqs. (17) and (18) of Ref. [17],
black, circles in red, triangles in blue, and stars in olive correspond
δcn = (k + 1)(A − 1)2/3 − kA2/3 , (5) to k = 1, 2, 3, 4, respectively. Panel (a) plots the n -δcn relation of
Eq. (3) and panel (b) plots the  p -δcp relation of Eq. (4). One clearly
δcp = (k − 1)(A − 1) 2/3
− kA
2/3
, (6) sees odd-even staggering of deviation around zero for all values of k.
with A = 2K − k = N + Z. The n -δcn formula of Eq. (3) The results extracted from the mass excess of 44 V in the AME2016
and the  p -δcp relation of Eq. (4) have been exemplified database are denoted with shadows, and results of the same nuclei by
to the AME2016 database, with their RMSD equal to 113 recent measurement [20] are shown by solid circles in orange. One
keV and 132 keV, respectively. Clearly, both n and  p are sees those large deviations are reduced substantially with results of
double mass differences for two successive mirror nuclei. If the recent experimental measurements.
the isospin symmetry is conserved, then the mass difference In Figs. 1(a) and 1(b), we plot the deviations of theoretical
of mirror nuclei should be interpreted in terms of Coulomb values by using Eqs. (3) and (4) from experimental data in
energy and neutron-proton mass difference. Yet the ambiguity the AME2016 database [11], where odd-even staggerings are
in Coulomb energies of two mirror nuclei leads to an RMSD easily seen, despite a few “anomalous” results which are
of 100–200 keV, even if one adopts pairing term individually denoted with open squares in shadow. These anomalies are all
for protons and neutrons, as discussed above. The key of the related to proton-rich nucleus 44 V whose experimental uncer-
substantial improvement of mass formulas in Ref. [17] is that tainty is very large (182 keV) in the AME2016 database. As
the difference between Coulomb energies of two successive Eqs. (3) and (4) are very accurate, it is tempting to predict the
nuclei is small; thus the effect of this ambiguity becomes much mass of this nucleus by these formulas. The predicted result
smaller, even if there is considerably large uncertainty in our of the mass excess for this nucleus was −23825 (44) keV,
theoretical Coulomb energy. −23716 (214) keV, and −23707 (132) keV, −23709 (113)
Let us proceed our discussion with rewriting Eqs. (3) and keV, respectively (see the Supplemental Material of Ref. [17]),
(4) in terms of m of Eq. (2), in comparison with −24116 (182) keV in the AME2016
n (K − k, K ) = m (K − k − 1, K ) − m (K − k, K ), database. Very interestingly, new mass measurements of this
nucleus were performed recently: Its experimental mass ex-
 p (K − k, K ) = m (K − k, K − 1) − m (K − k, K ).
cess was reported to be −23827 (20) keV in Ref. [20] and
From these two relations, one immediately sees that the −23805 (80) keV in Ref. [22], both of which are very close to
RMSD values for both n and  p are expected to exhibit our predicted results enclosed in the Supplemental Material of
an odd-even staggering. For example, n (K − k, K ) involves Ref. [17]. We now replace the mass excess of the 44 V nucleus
two m (N, Z ) with the same proton number Z = K, while the in the AME2016 database by the experimental mass excess
difference of their neutron numbers is 1, and therefore one of reported in Ref. [20] and replot those corresponding results
the neutron number of m involved in n (K − k, K ) is odd by using solid circles in orange. Here one sees that those
and the other is even. The situation is similar to  p (K − k, K ). anomalies almost disappear.

024302-2
MASS RELATIONS OF MIRROR NUCLEI PHYSICAL REVIEW C 102, 024302 (2020)

TABLE I. The RMSD (in keV) of Eqs. (3) and (4), the pair number of mirror nuclei involved (denoted by N ), and the values of our
parameters ac and C (in unit of keV) in Eqs. (3) and (4) optimized by using the AME2016 database [11], for nuclei with N and Z  10, and
with the result of 44V replaced by using the result of a recent measurement [20]. The results in the last row, labeled , are obtained by using
the same ac and C for different parity in Eqs. (3) and (4). RMSD , ac , and C  are the same results of Eqs. (3) and (4) but replacing the Coulomb
term in Eq. (1) with Eq. (8). ac and C are discriminated by their parity of proton and neutron numbers. For  p with odd proton numbers and
for n with odd neutron numbers, we denote the ac and C by “odd”; for  p with even proton numbers and for n with even neutron numbers,
we denote the ac and C by “even.”

 N RMSD ac (even, odd) C(even, odd) RMSD ac (even, odd) C  (even, odd)
n 43 82 701 ± 8, 733 ± 9 1599 ± 84, 2043 ± 99 82 690 ± 7, 723 ± 9 716 ± 74, 1124 ± 87
p 68 94 692 ± 7, 713 ± 7 1457 ± 83, 1843 ± 82 94 684 ± 7, 704 ± 7 607 ± 74, 962 ± 74
 111 93 696 ± 5, 719 ± 5 1527 ± 60, 1905 ± 63 92 688 ± 5, 710 ± 5 664 ± 54, 1011 ± 56

Now we make use of Eqs. (3) and (4), but with discrimina- an oversimplification of the Coulomb energy term in Eq. (1).
tion for parity of neutron number N for the n -δcn formula and If one assumes a more sophisticated form [23–25] instead,
for parity of proton number Z in the  p -δcp formula, and with Ec = Ecd + Ece + Ecs
updated mass excess of 44 V by experimental data in Ref. [20].  
In the first two rows of Table I we present the optimized Z2 5 3 2/3 Z 4/3 Z
= ac 1/3 − ac 1/3 − ac 1/3 , (8)
parameters ac and C in Eq. (3) and (4), and corresponding A 4 2π A A
RMSD values and the number (denoted by N ) of mirror pairs then one obtains much complicated formulas of δcn and δcp ,
in our calculations. There are in total eight parameters for  

n -δcn and  p -δcp formulas. The resultant RMSD values are denoted by δcn and δcp . In the above formula, the second term
82 keV and 94 keV for n -δcn and  p -δcp , respectively. Ece is called the exchange term in the Fermi gas model, and the
From Table I, one sees that the two set of parameters, one third term Ecs is called the self-energy term which equals the
set for n and the other set for  p , well overlap with each total Coulomb energy of Z protons moving individually in a
other. Thus, unlike Ref. [17], here we assume the same values sphere with the same size of the nucleus in consideration. For
of ac and C in Eq. (3) and (4) and present them in the third convenience and to be compact in our discussion, we present
 

row of Table I. This unification leads minor changes of the the formulas of δcn and δcp in the Appendix.
resultant RMSD values, but the total number of parameters is Assuming the Coulomb energy of Eq. (8), similarly to
reduced from 8 to 4. Eqs. (3) and (4) and Eq. (7), we have

By these unified notations of  and δc , we have n (K − k, K ) = ac δcn − C  , (9)
 = ac δc ∓ C, (7) 
 p (K − k, K ) = ac δcp + C  , (10)
where we take a − sign for n and a + sign for  p . The
-δc plot is presented in Fig. 2, where the results for  p with
odd proton numbers and for n with odd neutron numbers are
denoted by solid circles in red and by solid squares in black
otherwise. To be compact and convenient in our figure, the
plot for  p is presented by using | p | = − p and |δcp | = −δcp
(both  p and δcp are negative). One sees a clear odd-even
feature of n and  p for small |δcn | and |δcp |. The resultant
RMSD value of -δc relation is 93 keV for 111 pairs of mirror
nuclei.
In Table I, the values of parameters ac ∼ 0.7 MeV and are
close to the value of treating an atomic nucleus as a uniformed
charged sphere, which is equal to
3 e2
ac = ,
5 4π 0 r0
where r0 is usually taken to be 1.2 fm, correspondingly ac 
0.72 MeV. On the other hand, the parameter C is around 1.5 FIG. 2. n -δcn and  p -δcp correlations for nuclei with N, Z  10.
MeV for the “even” type and around 1.9 MeV for the “odd” Both  p and δcp are multiplied by −1 (see the text for details).
type, both of which are much larger than the expected value of Solid squares in black corresponds to n ( p ) with even neutron
C [0.782 MeV, see the discussion below Eq. (2)]. Furthermore, (proton) numbers, and circles in red corresponds to those with odd
the difference of parameter C between these two cases is about neutron (proton) numbers. The results are extracted based on the
0.4 MeV. Below we discuss these two issues. AME2016, except that the mass excess of the 44 V nucleus is replaced
Let us first come to the question why the value of C devi- by that measured in Ref. [20]. The straight lines are plotted by using
ates from its expected value. This issue could be explained by optimized parameters ac and C listed in the last row of Table I.

024302-3
ZONG, MA, ZHAO, AND ARIMA PHYSICAL REVIEW C 102, 024302 (2020)

The resultant values of ac and C  are listed in the last three
columns of Table I. The average value of parameter C  in
the last row is 0.838 keV, which is reasonably close to its
expected value (0.782 MeV). We note that the assumption of
a sophisticated Coulomb energy of Eq. (8) does account for
the agreement between the average value of parameter C  and
its expected value; on the other hand, the δc in Eqs. (9) and
(10) is more complex and the resultant RMSD values remain
essentially unchanged in comparison with those in Eqs. (3)
and (4) which are more favorable and convenient in numerical
practices due to their simplicities.
The second issue related to the parameter C is the large
difference (about 0.4 MeV) of the even and odd type of
-δc or -δc formulas. This puzzle is interpreted in terms
of an odd-even feature in the Coulomb energy, namely a
so-called pairing effect. This effect is not new and was
studied extensively more than half a century ago, e.g., in FIG. 3. The pairing gap of Coulomb energy δpair for mirror
Refs. [23,24,26,27]. See Ref. [25] for a comprehensive review. nuclei, with k = 1 and Z  10. The solid circles in black correspond
The general explanation is as follows. This odd-even feature in to empirical values of δpair defined in Eq. (11) and extracted by
Coulomb energy results from the pairing correlation of iden- using the AME2016 database with experimental uncertainty less than
tical protons, namely two protons have a larger probability 50 keV. The solid line in red correspond to δpair values defined in
of being found close together if their spins are oppositely Eq. (12), and the dotted lines in blue and green correspond to δpair
directed. The Coulomb interactions between protons are far taken from Refs. [24,25] and Ref. [26], respectively.
too weak to prevent pairing; on the other hand, the Coulomb
energy depends on the spatial distribution of protons, and In Refs. [23–27], the odd-even fluctuation of Coulomb
therefore its odd-even alternation is a rough measure of the energy is treated as an additional term in m (K − k, K ),
pairing correlation.
It is interesting to investigate the odd-even gap of C value m (K − k, K ) ≡ M(K − k, K ) − M(K, K − k)
extracted from experimental data and present a comparison
with the result in this paper (about 0.4 MeV) and previous the- = ac kA2/3 + δpair
c
+ k(M p − Mn ). (13)
oretical studies. Toward that goal, we first define the empirical
odd-even gap in Coulomb energy, δpair
c
= (−1)K ac /(2A1/3 ) keV in Refs. [24,25] and δpair c
=
60[1 + (−1) ] keV in Ref. [26] for k = 1. Thus theoretical
K
δpair (K − k, K ) odd-even gap of Coulomb energy is δpair = ac /A1/3 keV ac-
≡ 21 [m (K − k, K ) + m (K − k − 2, K − 2) cording to Refs. [24,25] and δpair = 120 keV according to
Ref. [26]. These two δpair are plotted in Fig. 3 by using dotted
− 2m (K − k − 1, K − 1)], (11) lines in blue and green, respectively.
with an assumption that m (K − k, K ) is given dominantly In general the four odd-even gaps in Coulomb energy, sum-
by the Coulomb energy difference and a parameter denoted marized in Fig. 3, are reasonably consistent, except that the
by (M p − Mn ) in Eq. (2). Here the values of m (K − k, K ) values of δpair used in Refs. [24,25] are systematically larger
are evaluated by using the AME2016 database. The δpair (K − than empirical values which are extracted from experimental
k, K ) values such extracted are plotted in Fig. 3 by using solid data of atomic masses. The large fluctuations of empirical
circles in black. values of δpair might result from various underlying physics
The theoretical odd-even gap in Coulomb energy that we (for example, the shell effect). The picture based on pairing
extract in this paper is based on systematics demonstrated in correlation between like particles [26] yields a rather constant
this work. Here we rewrite Eq. (7) as follows: value of δpair . The odd-even gap from systematics studied in
this paper exhibits a tendency of decrease with proton number.
(odd) = ac(odd) δ (odd) + C (odd) , The difference of these three results is warranted for further
(even) = ac(even) δ (even) − C (even) , studies in future.
Finally, the nice agreement of -δc relations encourage
where (odd) and δ (odd) correspond to n and δcn with odd us to predict nuclear mass excesses which are not accessible
neutron numbers or cp and δcp with odd proton numbers experimentally. We make use of Eq. (7) and the parameters
and (even) and δ (even) correspond to n and δcn with even in the last row in Table I in our predictions. For cases with
neutron numbers or cp and δcp with even proton numbers. Our two predicted results for a given nucleus, our predicted results
odd-even gap is then the difference between (odd) and (even) , are taken to be their average, with the weight of uncertainty,
δpair = (ac(odd) − ac(even) )|δc | + (C odd − C even ). (12) as in Ref. [17]. We predict 68 unknown mass excesses of
proton-rich nuclei with A from 26 to 90 and Z − N  4. Our
The results of δpair such obtained are plotted by using a solid predicted results are tabulated in the Supplemental Material
line in red in Fig. 3. [28] of this paper.

024302-4
MASS RELATIONS OF MIRROR NUCLEI PHYSICAL REVIEW C 102, 024302 (2020)

To summarize, in this paper we revisit mass relations where we make the approximation k  K. The difference of
of mirror nuclei and focus on an odd-even feature of the Coulomb energy related to the self-energy term for mirror
Coulomb energy, with which we construct new (and simple) nuclei is given by
mass formulas, with the resultant RMSD value 93 keV. For
the first time one has simple mass formulas for mirror nuclei K −k K
with the RMSD below 100 keV for light- and medium-mass −ac + ac 1/3 = −ac kA−1/3 .
A1/3 A
nuclei in a considerably large region. The values of parameters
in these formulas are discussed in considerable detail. In the From the above results, we obtain
Supplemental Material [28] we present our predictions of 68
mass excesses which are not yet accessible in the atomic mass m (K − k, K ) ≡ M(K − k, K ) − M(K, K − k)
evaluation database, with A from 26 to 90 and Z − N  4.
= ac k(A2/3 − A−1/3 − 0.808) + k(M p − Mn ).
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS (A1)
We thank the National Natural Science Foundation of
China (Grants No. 11975151, No. 11675101, and No. We substitute this result into the definition of n (K − k, K )
11961141003) and MOE Key Lab for Particle Physics, Astro- and  p (K − k, K ) and obtain
physics and Cosmology for financial support. Useful discus-
 
sions with Professor M. Wang are gratefully acknowledged. n (K − k, K ) = ac δcn − C  ,  p (K − k, K ) = ac δcp + C  ,

APPENDIX: FORMULAS OF δc where

We begin our discussion with the form of Eq. (8) for 
Coulomb energy of atomic nuclei. The difference of the direct δcn = (k + 1)(A − 2)(A − 1)−1/3 − k(A − 1)A−1/3 − 0.808,
term in Eq. (8) for mirror nuclei is given by the first term on (A2)
the right hand side of Eq. (2). The difference of Coulomb en-
ergy relate to the exchange term for mirror nuclei is given by 
δcp = (k − 1)(A − 2)(A − 1)−1/3 − k(A − 1)A−1/3 + 0.808.
   
5 3 2/3 (K − k)4/3 5 3 2/3 K 4/3 (A3)
ac − ac 1/3
4 2π A1/3 4 2π A We note that ac 
and C are the same for n (K − k, K ) with
 1/3 odd (even) numbers of (K − k) and  p (K − k, K ) with odd
5 1
− ac k ∼ −0.808ac k, (even) numbers of K, in the last row of Table I.
2 3π 2

[1] D. Lunney, J. M. Pearson, and C. Thibault, Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, [14] G. J. Fu, H. Jiang, Y. M. Zhao, S. Pittel, and A. Arima, Phys.
1021 (2003). Rev. C 82, 034304 (2010); G. J. Fu, Y. Lei, H. Jiang, Y. M.
[2] K. Blaum, Phys. Rep. 425, 1 (2006). Zhao, B. Sun, and A. Arima, ibid. 84, 034311 (2011).
[3] J. Duflo and A. P. Zuker, Phys. Rev. C 52, R23 (1995). [15] H. Jiang, G. J. Fu, B. Sun et al., Phys. Rev. C 85, 054303
[4] P. Möller, J. R. Nix, W. D. Myers et al., At. Data Nucl. Data (2012).
Tables 59, 185 (1995). [16] M. Bao, Y. Lu, Y. M. Zhao, and A. Arima, Phys. Rev. C 94,
[5] P. Möller, W. D. Myers, H. Sagawa, and S. Yoshida, Phys. Rev. 044323 (2016).
Lett. 108, 052501 (2012). [17] Y. Y. Zong, M. Q. Lin, M. Bao, Y. M. Zhao, and A. Arima, Phys.
[6] S. Goriely, N. Chamel, and J. M. Pearson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, Rev. C 100, 054315 (2019).
152503 (2009). [18] M. K. Basu and D. Banerjee, Phys. Rev. C 4, 652 (1971).
[7] N. Wang, Z. Liang, M. Liu, and X. Wu, Phys. Rev. C 82, 044304 [19] J. Jänecke, Phys. Rev. C 6, 467 (1972).
(2010). [20] Y. H. Zhang, P. Zhang, X. H. Zhou et al., Phys. Rev. C 98,
[8] N. Wang, M. Liu, X. Z. Wu et al., Phys. Lett. B 734, 215 014319 (2018).
(2014). [21] J. Tian, N. Wang, C. Li, and J. Li, Phys. Rev. C 87, 014313
[9] G. Audi, A. H. Wapstra, and C. Thibault, Nucl. Phys. A 729, (2013).
337 (2003). [22] D. Puentes, G. Bollen, M. Brodeur et al., Phys. Rev. C 101,
[10] G. Audi, M. Wang, A. H. Wapstra et al., Chin. Phys. C 36, 1287 064309 (2020).
(2012); M. Wang, G. Audi, A. H. Wapstra et al., ibid. 36, 1603 [23] B. C. Carlson and I. Talmi, Phys. Rev. 96, 436 (1954).
(2012). [24] S. Sengupta, Nucl. Phys. 21, 542 (1960).
[11] W. J. Huang, G. Audi, Meng Wang et al., Chin. Phys. C 41, [25] J. A. Nolen and J. P. Schiffer, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Sci. 19, 471
030002 (2017); Meng Wang, G. Audi, F. G. Kondev et al., ibid. (1969).
41, 030003 (2017). [26] J. Jänecke, Z. Phys. 196, 477 (1966).
[12] G. T. Garvey and I. Kelson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 16, 197 (1966); [27] E. Feenberg and G. Goertzel, Phys. Rev. 70, 597 (1946).
G. T. Garvey, W. J. Gerace, R. L. Jaffe et al., Rev. Mod. Phys. [28] See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/
41, S1 (1969). 10.1103/PhysRevC.102.024302 for predicted mass excesses of
[13] I. Kelson and G. T. Garvey, Phys. Lett. 23, 689 (1966). proton-rich nuclei with mass number from 26 to 90.

024302-5