- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review C

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Impact of nuclear masses on r-process nucleosynthesis: Bulk properties versus shell effects

Samuel A. Giuliani1, Gabriel Martínez-Pinedo2,3,4, Andreas Bauswein2,4, and Vimal Vijayan2

PDF

Phys. Rev. C 113, 045806 – Published 27 April, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/k64z-32sr

Abstract

We investigate the impact of the model estimating the masses of exotic nuclei on r-process nucleosynthesis, assessing the dependence of the abundance distribution on the specific properties of nuclear masses. By decomposing theoretical nuclear mass predictions into a liquid-drop parametrization and local shell effects, we show that r-process abundances are virtually insensitive to large variations of the masses, which originate from nuclear bulk properties of the model, such as the symmetry energy. In contrast, the mass component associated with local shell effects is the main driver of r-process abundance variations, despite its relatively minor contribution to the absolute value of neutron separation energies. Our work suggests that experimental and theoretical studies of masses devoted to r-process applications, such as the nucleosynthesis in the ejecta of neutron star mergers, should focus on the physical origin and determination of local changes in mass trends.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (51)

  1. National Research Council, Connecting Quarks with the Cosmos: Eleven Science Questions for the New Century (The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2003).
  2. E. M. Burbidge, G. R. Burbidge, W. A. Fowler, and F. Hoyle, Synthesis of the elements in stars, Rev. Mod. Phys. 29, 547 (1957).
  3. A. G. W. Cameron, Nuclear reactions in stars and nucleogenesis, Publ. Astron. Soc. Pacific 69, 201 (1957).
  4. C. J. Horowitz et al., r-process nucleosynthesis: connecting rare-isotope beam facilities with the cosmos, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 46, 083001 (2019).
  5. T. Kajino, W. Aoki, A. Balantekin, R. Diehl, M. Famiano, and G. Mathews, Current status of r-process nucleosynthesis, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 107, 109 (2019).
  6. M. Arnould and S. Goriely, Astronuclear Physics: A tale of the atomic nuclei in the skies, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 112, 103766 (2020).
  7. J. J. Cowan, C. Sneden, J. E. Lawler, A. Aprahamian, M. Wiescher, K. Langanke, G. Martínez-Pinedo, and F.-K. Thielemann, Origin of the heaviest elements: The rapid neutron-capture process, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 015002 (2021).
  8. E. Symbalisty and D. N. Schramm, Neutron star collisions and the r-process, Astrophys. Lett. 22, 143 (1982).
  9. J. M. Lattimer and D. N. Schramm, Black-hole-neutron-star collisions, Astrophys. J. 192, L145 (1974).
  10. E. M. D. Symbalisty, D. N. Schramm, and J. R. Wilson, An expanding vortex site for the r-process in rotating stellar collapse, Astrophys. J. 291, L11 (1985).
  11. A. I. MacFadyen and S. E. Woosley, Collapsars: Gamma‐ray bursts and explosions in “failed supernovae”, Astrophys. J. 524, 262 (1999).
  12. B. P. Abbott et al., Multi-messenger observations of a binary neutron star merger, Astrophys. J. 848, L12 (2017).
  13. V. A. Villar et al., The combined ultraviolet, optical, and near-infrared light curves of the kilonova associated with the binary neutron star merger GW170817: Unified data set, analytic models, and physical implications, Astrophys. J. 851, L21 (2017).
  14. B. P. Abbott et al., GW170817: Observation of gravitational waves from a binary neutron star inspiral, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 161101 (2017).
  15. B. A. Brown et al., Motivations for early high-profile FRIB experiments, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 52, 050501 (2025).
  16. J. Duflo and A. P. Zuker, Microscopic mass formulas, Phys. Rev. C 52, R23 (1995).
  17. S. Goriely, N. Chamel, and J. M. Pearson, Further explorations of Skyrme-Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov mass formulas. XII. Stiffness and stability of neutron-star matter, Phys. Rev. C 82, 035804 (2010).
  18. M. Liu, N. Wang, Y. Deng, and X. Wu, Further improvements on a global nuclear mass model, Phys. Rev. C 84, 014333 (2011).
  19. P. Möller, A. J. Sierk, T. Ichikawa, and H. Sagawa, Nuclear ground-state masses and deformations: FRDM(2012), At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 109-110, 1 (2016).
  20. G. Grams, N. N. Shchechilin, A. Sánchez-Fernández, W. Ryssens, N. Chamel, and S. Goriely, Skyrme-Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov mass models on a 3D mesh: IV. Improved description of the isospin dependence of pairing, Eur. Phys. J. A 61, 35 (2025).
  21. R. Utama and J. Piekarewicz, Refining mass formulas for astrophysical applications: A Bayesian neural network approach, Phys. Rev. C 96, 044308 (2017).
  22. Z. Niu and H. Liang, Nuclear mass predictions based on Bayesian neural network approach with pairing and shell effects, Phys. Lett. B 778, 48 (2018).
  23. L. Neufcourt, Y. Cao, S. A. Giuliani, W. Nazarewicz, E. Olsen, and O. B. Tarasov, Quantified limits of the nuclear landscape, Phys. Rev. C 101, 044307 (2020).
  24. R.-D. Lasseri, D. Regnier, J.-P. Ebran, and A. Penon, Taming nuclear complexity with a committee of multilayer neural networks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 162502 (2020).
  25. M. Mumpower, M. Li, T. M. Sprouse, B. S. Meyer, A. E. Lovell, and A. T. Mohan, Bayesian averaging for ground state masses of atomic nuclei in a Machine Learning approach, Front. Phys. 11, 1198572 (2023).
  26. Y. Saito, I. Dillmann, R. Krücken, M. R. Mumpower, and R. Surman, Uncertainty quantification of mass models using ensemble Bayesian model averaging, Phys. Rev. C 109, 054301 (2024).
  27. A. Arcones and G. Martínez-Pinedo, Dynamical r-process studies within the neutrino-driven wind scenario and its sensitivity to the nuclear physics input, Phys. Rev. C 83, 045809 (2011).
  28. A. Arcones and G. F. Bertsch, Nuclear Correlations and the r Process, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 151101 (2012).
  29. J. D. J. Mendoza-Temis, M.-R. Wu, K. Langanke, G. Martínez-Pinedo, A. Bauswein, and H.-T. Janka, Nuclear robustness of the r process in neutron-star mergers, Phys. Rev. C 92, 055805 (2015).
  30. M. R. Mumpower, R. Surman, D.-L. Fang, M. Beard, P. Möller, T. Kawano, and A. Aprahamian, Impact of individual nuclear masses on r-process abundances, Phys. Rev. C 92, 035807 (2015).
  31. D. Martin, A. Arcones, W. Nazarewicz, and E. Olsen, Impact of nuclear mass uncertainties on the r-process, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 121101 (2016).
  32. T. M. Sprouse, R. Navarro Perez, R. Surman, M. R. Mumpower, G. C. McLaughlin, and N. Schunck, Propagation of statistical uncertainties of Skyrme mass models to simulations of r-process nucleosynthesis, Phys. Rev. C 101, 055803 (2020).
  33. N. Vassh, G. C. McLaughlin, M. R. Mumpower, and R. Surman, Markov Chain Monte Carlo predictions of neutron-rich lanthanide properties as a probe of r-process dynamics, Astrophys. J. 907, 98 (2021).
  34. Y.-L. Zhu, K. A. Lund, J. Barnes, T. M. Sprouse, N. Vassh, G. C. McLaughlin, M. R. Mumpower, and R. Surman, Modeling kilonova light curves: Dependence on nuclear inputs, Astrophys. J. 906, 94 (2021).
  35. I. K. B. Kullmann, S. Goriely, O. Just, A. Bauswein, and H.-T. Janka, Impact of systematic nuclear uncertainties on composition and decay heat of dynamical and disc ejecta in compact binary mergers, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 523, 2551 (2023).
  36. P. Moller, J. R. Nix, W. D. Myers, and W. J. Swiatecki, Nuclear ground-state masses and deformations, At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 59, 185 (1995).
  37. C. E. Collins, A. Bauswein, S. A. Sim, V. Vijayan, G. Martínez-Pinedo, O. Just, L. J. Shingles, and M. Kromer, 3D radiative transfer kilonova modelling for binary neutron star merger simulations, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 521, 1858 (2023).
  38. V. M. Strutinsky, Shell effects in nuclear masses and deformation energies, Nucl. Phys. A 95, 420 (1967).
  39. W. D. Myers and W. J. Swiatecki, The macroscopic approach to nuclear masses and deformations, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 32, 309 (1982).
  40. P.-G. Reinhard, M. Bender, W. Nazarewicz, and T. Vertse, From finite nuclei to the nuclear liquid drop: Leptodermous expansion based on self-consistent mean-field theory, Phys. Rev. C 73, 014309 (2006).
  41. M. Wang, W. J. Huang, F. Kondev, G. Audi, and S. Naimi, The AME 2020 atomic mass evaluation (II). Tables, graphs and references, Chin. Phys. C 45, 030003 (2021).
  42. W. Satuła, J. Dobaczewski, and W. Nazarewicz, Odd-even staggering of nuclear masses: Pairing or shape effect? Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 3599 (1998).
  43. J. Dobaczewski, P. Magierski, W. Nazarewicz, W. Satuła, and Z. Szymański, Odd-even staggering of binding energies as a consequence of pairing and mean-field effects, Phys. Rev. C 63, 024308 (2001).
  44. R. Bengtsson, J.-y. Zhang, J.-y. Zhang, and S. Åberg, On the analogy between backbending in gauge space and in ordinary space, Phys. Lett. B 105, 5 (1981).
  45. L. Buskirk, K. Godbey, W. Nazarewicz, and W. Satuła, Nucleonic shells and nuclear masses, Phys. Rev. C 109, 044311 (2024).
  46. A. J. Koning, S. Hilaire, and M. C. Duijvestijn, TALYS-1.0, in Proceedings of the International Conference on Nuclear Data for Science and Technology, April 22-27, 2007, Nice, France, edited by O. Bersillon, F. Gunsing, E. Bauge, R. Jacqmin, and S. Leray (EDP Sciences, Les Ulis, 2008), pp. 211–214.
  47. I. V. Panov, I. Y. Korneev, T. Rauscher, G. Martínez-Pinedo, A. Kelić-Heil, N. T. Zinner, and F.-K. Thielemann, Neutron-induced astrophysical reaction rates for translead nuclei, Astron. Astrophys. 513, A61 (2010).
  48. A. Kelic, M. Valentina Ricciardi, and K.-H. Schmidt, ABLA07 - towards a complete description of the decay channels of a nuclear system from spontaneous fission to multifragmentation, arXiv:0906.4193.
  49. R. Ardevol-Pulpillo, H. T. Janka, O. Just, and A. Bauswein, Improved leakage-equilibration-absorption scheme (ILEAS) for neutrino physics in compact object mergers, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 485, 4754 (2019).
  50. H. Hergert, A guided tour of ab initio nuclear many-body theory, Front. Phys. 8, 379 (2020).
  51. A. Sobiczewski and Y. A. Litvinov, Predictive power of nuclear-mass models, Phys. Rev. C 90, 017302 (2014).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. C 113, 045806– Published 27 April, 2026
  • Received 2 December 2024
  • Revised 9 December 2025
  • Accepted 30 March 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation