Influence of Structural Properties on Fusion Cross-Sections Using Proximity Potentials
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14500/aro.12265Keywords:
Fusion cross-sections, Magic numbers effect, Mean difference, Neutron excess effect, Proximity potentials, Shell structure effectAbstract
In this study, an optimal nuclear proximity potential is used to get more accurate fusion cross-section predictions. For 111 colliding systems, we evaluate the predictive accuracy of several proximity potential models interfaced with Wong’s formula in reproducing the fusion cross-section experimental data. For the purpose of Chi-square minimization technique, Christensen and Winther 1976 potential is selected. The analysis examines fusion dynamics across a wide range of nuclear configurations (6 ≤ Zp (projectile atomic number)≤28, 6 ≤ Zt (target atomic number) ≤94, and 36 ≤ Zp Zt ≤ 1880). To increase accuracy and match experimental data, a Python code that calculates cross-sections for all proximity potentials is established using the Nelder–Mead algorithm. The extensive range of calculations facilitates a systematic study of the effects of structural factors, including magic numbers, shell structure, neutron excess, and pairing effect. The results reveal that shell effects can sometimes overcome neutron excess and produce unexpected fusion trends, as seen in the 28Si + 90Zr and 28Si + 94Zr. In other reactions, the shell effect eliminated the effect of the neutron excess, such as in the 16O + 62Ni versus 16O + 58Ni and 12C + 208Pb versus 12C + 204Pb reactions. Our findings also highlighted the important role of the projectile in the process of fusion. The titanium isotopes (46Ti, 50Ti) in particular fused more effectively with 12C than with 16O. Nickel isotopes show similar projectiledependent behavior.
Downloads
References
Abdi, H., and Williams, L.J., 2010. Tukey’s honestly significant difference (HSD) test. In: Salkind, N.J., Ed. Encyclopedia of Research Design. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp.1-5.
Błocki, J., Randrup, J., Świa̧Tecki, W.J., and Tsang, C.F., 1977. Proximity forces. Annals of Physics, 105(2), pp.427-462.
Brown, A.M., 2005. A new software for carrying out one-way ANOVA post hoc tests. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine, 79(1), pp.89-95.
Brown, B.A., 2015. The nuclear pairing gap - how low can it go? Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 580(1), p.012016.
Brown, B.A., Derevianko, A., and Flambaum, V.V., 2009. Calculations of the neutron skin and its effect in atomic parity violation. Physical Review C, 79(3), p.035501.
Christensen, P.R., and Winther, A., 1976. The evidence of the ion-ion potentials from heavy ion elastic scattering. Physics Letters B, 65(1), pp.19-22.
Deb, N., 2019. Behaviour of nuclear bass and winther potentials towards the fusion sub-barrier cross section of 16O+58, 62Ni. Journal of Applied and Fundamental Sciences, 5(2), p.49.
Denisov, V.Y., and Pilipenko, N.A., 2010. Interaction and fusion of deformed nuclei. Physics of Atomic Nuclei, 73(7), pp.1152-1163.
Denisov, V.Y., and Sedykh, I.Y., 2019. Empirical relations for the fusion cross sections of heavy ions. The European Physical Journal A, 55(9), p.153.
Dutt, I., and Puri, R.K., 2010a. Analytical parametrization of fusion barriers using proximity potentials. Physical Review C, 81(6), p.064608.
Dutt, I., and Puri, R.K., 2010b. Systematic study of the fusion barriers using different proximity-type potentials for N=Z colliding nuclei: New extensions. Physical Review C, 81(4), p.044615.
Gautam, M., Kaur, A., and Sharma, M., 2015. Fusion Dynamics of + Reaction Using Static and Energy Dependent Woods-Saxon Potential, Proceedings of the DAE-BRNS Symposium on Nuclear Physics. Vol. 60. Bhabha Atomic Research Centre.
Gharaei, R., and Sarvari, E., 2024. Investigating the impact of the universal function of the nuclear proximity potential in heavy-ion fusion cross sections. Communications in Theoretical Physics, 76(5), p.055301.
Gharaei, R., Hadikhani, A., and Zanganeh, V., 2019. An explanation for the anomaly problem of diffuseness parameter of the nucleus-nucleus potential in heavy-ion fusion reactions: A possible thermal solution. Nuclear Physics A, 990, pp.47-63.
Gharaei, R., Zanganeh, V., and Wang, N., 2018. Systematic study of proximity potentials for heavy-ion fusion cross sections. Nuclear Physics A, 979, pp.237-250.
Ghodsi, O.N., and Daei-Ataollah, A., 2016. Systematic study of α decay using various versions of the proximity formalism. Physical Review C, 93(2), p.024612.
Guo, C.L., Zhang, G.L., and Le, X.Y., 2013. Study of the universal function of nuclear proximity potential from density-dependent nucleon–nucleon interaction. Nuclear Physics A, 897, pp.54-61.
Hagino, K., and Maeno, Y., 2020. A nuclear periodic table. Foundations of Chemistry, 22(2), pp.267-273.
Ikezoe, H., Satou, K., Mitsuoka, S.I., Nishio, K., Tsuruta, K., Jeong, S.C., and Lin, C.J., 2004. Effect of closed shell structure on heavy-ion fusion reactions. Progress of Theoretical Physics Supplement, 154, pp.45-52.
Kim, T.K., 2017. Understanding one-way ANOVA using conceptual figures. Korean Journal of Anesthesiology, 70(1), pp.22.
Lu, Z., and Yuan, K.H., 2010. Welch’s t test. In: Salkind, N.J., Eds. Encyclopedia of Research Design. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp.1620-1623.
Manjunatha, H.C., Sowmya, N., Seenappa, L., Damodara Gupta, P.S., and Manjunatha, N., 2023. Heavy ion fusion of spherical nuclei. Chinese Physics C, 47(10), pp.104104.
Mathews, J.H., and Fink, K.D., 2004. Numerical Methods using Matlab. Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Mişicu, Ş., and Esbensen, H., 2007. Signature of shallow potentials in deep subbarrier fusion reactions. Physical Review C-Nuclear Physics, 75(3), p.034606. Neideen, T., and Brasel, K., 2007. Understanding statistical tests. Journal of Surgical Education, 64(2), pp.93-96.
Nelder, J.A., and Mead, R., 1965. A simplex method for function minimization. The Computer Journal, 7(4), pp.308-313.
Ostertagova, E., and Ostertag, O., 2013. Methodology and application of oneway ANOVA. American Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 1, pp.256-261.
Othman, B.M., Hussein, A.M., and Taqi, A.H., 2023. Effect of diffuseness parameter on the fusion cross-section of closed-shell nuclei. Rafidain Journal of Science, 32(2), pp.53-63.
Recchia, F., Chiara, C.J., Janssens, R.V.F., Weisshaar, D., Gade, A., Walters, W.B., Albers, M., Alcorta, M., Bader, V.M., Baugher, T., Bazin, D., Berryman, J.S., Bertone, P.F., Brown, B.A., Campbell, C.M., Carpenter, M.P., Chen, J., Crawford, H.L., David, H.M., Doherty, D.T., Hoffman, C.R., Kondev, F.G., Korichi, A., Langer, C., Larson, N., Lauritsen, T., Liddick, S.N., Lunderberg, E., Macchiavelli, A.O., Noji, S., Prokop, C., Rogers, A.M., Seweryniak, D., Stroberg, S.R., Suchyta, S., Williams, S., Wimmer, K., and Zhu, S., 2013. Configuration mixing and relative transition rates between low-spin states in 68Ni. Physical Review C, 88(4), p.041302.
Sargsyan, V.V., Scamps, G., Adamian, G.G., Antonenko, N.V., and Lacroix, D., 2013. Neutron-pair transfer in the sub-barrier capture process. Physical Review C, 88(6), p.064601.
Thiha, K., and Lwin, N.W., 2012. Effects of Different Potential Models for the 16O+ 144,154Sm Fusion Reactions. Universities Research Journal, 5(1), pp.257-268.
Tukey, J.W., 1953. The Problem of Multiple Comparisons. Multiple Comparisons. Princeton University, New Jersey.
Umar, A.S., and Oberacker, V.E., 2007. 64Ni + 132Sn fusion within the densityconstrained time-dependent Hartree-Fock formalism. Physical Review C-Nuclear Physics, 76(1), p.014614.
Yulianto, Y., and Zu’ud, Z., 2018. Numerical study of fusion cross sections for 12C+12C and 16O+16O reactions by using wong formula. Jurnal Fisika FLUX, 15, p.105.
Zanganeh, V., Gharaei, R., and Izadpanah, A.M., 2019. Comparative study for different nuclear proximity potentials applied to quasi-elastic scattering and fusion reactions. Nuclear Physics A, 992, p.121637.
Zhang, G.L., Liu, X.X., and Lin, C.J., 2014. Systematic analysis of the effect of a positive Q-value neutron transfer in fusion reactions. Physical Review C, 89(5), p.054602.
Zhang, G.L., Yao, Y.J., Guo, M.F., Pan, M., Zhang, G.X., and Liu, X.X., 2016. Comparative studies for different proximity potentials applied to large cluster radioactivity of nuclei. Nuclear Physics A, 951, pp.86-96.
Zhang, G.L., Zheng, H.B., and Qu, W.W., 2013. Study of the universal function of nuclear proximity potential between α and nuclei from density-dependent nucleon-nucleon interaction. The European Physical Journal A, 49(10), p.10.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Adil M. Saeed, Lina S. Abdalmajid

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who choose to publish their work with Aro agree to the following terms:
-
Authors retain the copyright to their work and grant the journal the right of first publication. The work is simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License [CC BY-NC-SA 4.0]. This license allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
-
Authors have the freedom to enter into separate agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work. This includes options such as posting it to an institutional repository or publishing it in a book, as long as proper acknowledgement is given to its initial publication in this journal.
-
Authors are encouraged to share and post their work online, including in institutional repositories or on their personal websites, both prior to and during the submission process. This practice can lead to productive exchanges and increase the visibility and citation of the published work.
By agreeing to these terms, authors acknowledge the importance of open access and the benefits it brings to the scholarly community.
Accepted 2025-09-01
Published 2025-11-12







ARO Journal is a scientific, peer-reviewed, periodical, and diamond OAJ that has no APC or ASC.