Title: Uncertainty quantification due to optical potentials in models for ( $d,p$ ) reactions

Abstract

Recent work has studied the uncertainty in predictions for $A(d,p)B$ reactions using the distorted-wave Born approximation (DWBA), coming from the parametrization of the effective $dA$ interactions [Lovell et al. Phys. Rev. C 95, 024611 (2017)]. There are different levels of sophistication in reaction theories for one-nucleon transfer reactions, including the adiabatic wave approximation (ADWA) which takes deuteron breakup into account to all orders. In this paper, we quantify the uncertainties associated with the ADWA method that come from the parametrization of the NA interactions and compare ADWA with DWBA. Similar to Lovell et al., we use nucleon elastic-scattering data on a wide variety of targets at the appropriate incoming and outgoing energies to constrain the optical potential input to the ADWA theory. Pulling from the ${\chi }^2$ distribution, we obtain 95% confidence bands for the elastic distributions. From the resulting parameters, we predict 95% confidence bands for the $(d,p)$ transfer cross sections. Results obtained with the standard uncorrelated ${\chi }^2$ are compared to those using the correlated ${\chi }^2$ of Lovell et al. We also repeat the DWBA calculations for the exact same reactions for comparison purposes. We find that NA elastic-scattering data provide a significant constraint to the interactions, and, when the uncertainties are propagated to the transfer reactions using ADWA, predictions are consistent with the transfer data. The angular distributions for ADWA differ from those predicted by DWBA, particularly at small angles. As in Lovell et al., confidence bands obtained using the uncorrelated ${\chi }^2$ function are unrealistically narrow and become much wider when the correlated ${\chi }^2$ function is considered. For most cases, the uncertainty bands obtained in ADWA are narrower than DWBA when using elastic data of similar quality and range. However, given the large uncertainties predicted from the correlated ${\chi }^2$ function, at this point, the transfer data cannot discriminate between these two methods.

Authors:

King, G. B. ^[1]; Lovell, A. E. ^[2]; Nunes, F. M. ^[1]

---

+ Show Author Affiliations

1. Michigan State Univ., East Lansing, MI (United States). National Superconducting Cyclotron Lab. Dept. of Physics and Astronomy
2. Michigan State Univ., East Lansing, MI (United States). National Superconducting Cyclotron Lab. Dept. of Physics and Astronomy; Los Alamos National Lab. (LANL), Los Alamos, NM (United States)

Publication Date:

Fri Oct 26 00:00:00 EDT 2018

Research Org.:

Michigan State Univ., East Lansing, MI (United States); Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Los Alamos, NM (United States)

Sponsoring Org.:

USDOE National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA); National Science Foundation (NSF)

OSTI Identifier:

1525887

Alternate Identifier(s):

OSTI ID: 1479168

Grant/Contract Number:  

FG52-08NA28552; NA0002135; PHY-1403906; FG52- 08NA28552

Resource Type:

Accepted Manuscript

Journal Name:

Physical Review C

Additional Journal Information:

Journal Volume: 98; Journal Issue: 4; Journal ID: ISSN 2469-9985

Publisher:

American Physical Society (APS)

Country of Publication:

United States

Language:

English

Subject:

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS