logo

Mechanisms of mirror energy difference for states exhibiting Thomas-Ehrman shift: Gamow shell model case studies of 18Ne/18O and 19Na/19O

NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH

Mechanisms of mirror energy difference for states exhibiting Thomas-Ehrman shift: Gamow shell model case studies of 18Ne/18O and 19Na/19O

Kun-Hao Li
Pei-Yan Wang
Jian-Guo Li
Nicolas Michel
Meng-Ran Xie
Chun-Wang Ma
Wei Zuo
Nuclear Science and TechniquesVol.37, No.6Article number 109Published in print Jun 2026Available online 28 Mar 2026
11400

The mirror energy difference (MED) of the mirror state, particularly for states exhibiting the Thomas-Ehrman shift, serves as a sensitive probe of mirror symmetry breaking. We employ the Gamow shell model, which includes the inter-nucleon correlation and continuum coupling, to investigate the MED for sd-shell nuclei by taking 18Ne/18O and 19Na/19O as examples. Our GSM provides good descriptions of the excitation energies and MEDs for the 18Ne/18O and 19Na/19O. Moreover, our calculations also reveal that the large MED of the mirror states is caused by the significant occupation of the weakly bound or unbound s1/2 waves, giving the radial density distribution of the state in the proton-rich nucleus more extension than that of mirror states in deeply bound neutron-rich nuclei. Moreover, our GSM calculation shows that the contribution of Coulomb is different for the low-lying states in proton-rich nuclei, which significantly contributes to the MEDs of mirror states, which is well recognized. Furthermore, our GSM calculation indicates that the contributions of the nucleon-nucleon interaction are different for the mirror state, especially for the state of proton-rich nuclei bearing the Thomas-Ehrman shift, which also contributes to the significant mirror symmetry breaking with a large MED.

Mirror symmetry breakingThomas-Ehrman shiftMirror energy differenceContinuum couplingGamow shell model
1

Introduction

Exotic nuclear structures in drip-line nuclei have become a subject of great interest in recent years, as they are characterized by unique properties that exhibit significant differences from those of stable nuclei [1-5]. One of the most significant phenomena observed in these systems is the Thomas-Ehrman shift (TES) [6, 7]. This effect is most pronounced in nuclei close to the proton drip lines, where the balance between the strong force and the Coulomb force is delicate. States exhibiting TES effects are often weakly bound or unbound, which is characteristic of open quantum systems, while their neutron-rich mirror counterparts remain deeply bound, resulting in a large mirror energy difference (MED) in their isobaric states [6-11]. The large MEDs are attributed to their proximity to near-threshold effects, in which the continuum effects must be well treated. Consequently, a thorough comprehension of the Thomas-Ehrman shift is pivotal for elucidating the dynamics of weakly bound and unbound nuclear systems and understanding the mechanisms underlying mirror-symmetry breaking in mirror nuclei.

Two possible reasons exist for the states with large MED: external or internal characteristics. If the extended single-particle wave functions of weakly or unbound s- or p-waves are significantly occupied in the considered states, the large MED is of an external nature, as in the TES states [9, 12, 13]. The second possibility is related to configuration mixing (see Refs.[14, 15]), is of internal nature. In this case, the extended wave function is given via strong configuration mixing, in which a few nodal states of s or p waves are included in the calculations. These two external and internal effects are different but can be intertwined in complex ways. For instance, the inversion of ground states in the 16F and 16N mirror nuclei is primarily due to the unbound proton 1s1/2 orbital, which can also be well described in GSM calculations within the configuration mixing framework [13, 16].

The sd-shell nuclei, situated at the boundary between the light and heavy nuclei, exhibit a wide range of nuclear structure phenomena that remain somewhat mysterious [17]. In recent years, these nuclei have been extensively studied using various experimental techniques [18-21]. A wealth of information on the Thomas-Ehrman shift has been gleaned from sd-shell proton drip-line nuclei, where numerous states exhibiting significant TES effects have been identified [8-10, 22]. For instance, the mirror pairs 18Ne/18O [8, 23] and 19Na/19O [22] serve as notable examples. For sd-shell nuclei, the TES is mainly driven by s-waves. Indeed, the proton 1s1/2 orbital is weakly bound or unbound in proton drip-line nuclei, whereas the neutron 1s1/2 orbital is well bound in their mirror neutron-rich nuclei.

Several theoretical models have been developed to probe the mirror asymmetry for mirror nuclei, such as the standard shell model (SM) [24-28], mean-field calculations [29, 30], and ab initio approaches [23, 31-34]. Within the standard SM calculations, weakly bound and unbound wave functions on eigenenergies are indirectly considered by phenomenologically adjusting the matrix element related to 1s1/2 orbit [9, 12]. Mean-field calculations, such as the Skyrme-Hartree-Fock, have also been extensively employed in MED studies [29, 30]. However, these models involve parameters constrained by data [24, 29, 35]. In recent years, ab initio approaches, such as the ab initio valence-space in-medium similarity renormalization group, have also been applied to study MEDs of sd-shell nuclei [10, 11, 23, 31-34, 36], in which the extended many-body wavefunctions are partially described using a large number of HO spaces. Moreover, current theoretical calculations have pointed out that the TES is caused by the repulsive Coulomb interaction and the occupations of weakly bound or unbound s- or p-waves for the valence protons. However, detailed studies on the TES mechanism are lacking. In recent shell model calculations [28], the TES was investigated using the calculated spectroscopic factors. Moreover, in our previous work [36], we compared the results of the MED calculated using the shell model with spectroscopic factors and the ab initio valence-space in-medium similarity renormalization ground approach. The two models yielded similar results.

One of the major challenges in studying drip-line nuclei is accounting for the interplay between configuration mixing and continuum effects. The Gamow shell model (GSM) [14, 15, 23, 31, 37-42] has emerged as a powerful tool in this regard, as it provides a unified framework for describing the structure of nuclei close to the particle emission threshold and allows for an accurate understanding of the exotic properties of drip line nuclei. Based on the above situation, we employ the GSM to investigate the significant mirror symmetry breaking with large MED values and the mechanism behind it for the sd-shell nuclei, taking the 18Ne/18O and 19Na/19O mirror partners as examples.

2

Method

The GSM is a multiconfiguration shell model framework that works in the picture of a core plus valence nucleons [39, 40, 43-45]. At the heart of the GSM lies the utilization of the one-body Berggren basis [46], which possesses bound, resonance, and scattering states generated by a finite-range potential, typically of Woods-Saxon (WS) type (see details in Ref. [39, 40, 46]). The GSM Hamiltonian matrix is characterized by complex symmetry [39, 40]. The overlap method, along with the Jacobi-Davidson method extended to complex-symmetric matrices, was adopted to diagonalize and identify many-body resonance eigenstates [39, 40, 47]. Consequently, the GSM calculation includes both the inter-nucleon correlations and continuum coupling [39, 40, 43].

The many-body Schrödinger equation of the GSM Hamiltonian can be solved within the so-called cluster orbital shell model (COSM) formalism [48] (see Refs. [40, 49, 50]). The GSM Hamiltonian in COSM coordinates reads [40, 49, 50]:pic (1)where Aval is the number of valence nucleons, μi is the effective mass of the nucleon, is represented by a one-body WS potential mimicking the inert core. is the residual inter-nucleon interaction, which is modeled by a pionless effective field theory (EFT) interaction [51, 52], in which only two-body contact terms up to next-to-next leading order are considered. The regularization approach adopted in Refs. [44, 53-56] is used. The last term embodies the recoil effects induced by the finite mass of the core Mc. The EFT interaction was optimized to reproduce the low-lying states of the selected nuclei.

In the present work, the 18Ne/18O and 19Na/19O mirror partners are considered as examples. The doubly magic nucleus 16O was chosen as the inert core, and the s1/2, p1/2,3/2 and d3/2,5/2 partial waves were represented by the Berggren basis, in which 40 discretization points were used in total for continuum states in each partial wave. The f5/2,7/2 partial waves were treated using the HO basis, in which six HO states were adopted for each of the partial waves. To estimate the effects of higher orbitals, we compared the results after adding the g7/2,9/2 partial waves under the HO basis. The difference in the binding and excitation energies of the states studied in the present work was less than 5 keV. Thus, higher partial waves are neglected. Only the Coulomb force is considered for the isospin non-conserving part of the GSM Hamiltonian. The contribution of the isospin-dependent part of the nuclear interaction to the TES is small, which is neglected in the present GSM calculations. The Hamiltonian used in Ref. [57] was adopted in this study. The calculated excitation energies of 18Ne/18O and 19Na/19O mirror partners are presented in Tables. 1 and 2, which show good agreements with experimental data [58]. In the following section, the mechanics of the mirror energies differences for the 18Ne/18O and 19Na/19O mirror partners are investigated in detail.

Table 1
The calculated excitation energies of 18Ne/18O with GSM and SM calculations in harmonic oscillator single sd- shell model space without including higher orbitals, along with experimental data [58]. The unit of excitation energy is given in MeV, and the units of particle decay width and MED are given in keV
18Ne 18O MED
Eexp EGSM ESM Γexp ΓGSM Eexp EGSM ESM EXP GSM SM
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.89 1.83 1.72 0 1.98 1.93 1.77 -95 -106 -50
3.38 2.72 2.08 0 3.56 2.72 2.21 -179 -3 -130
3.62 3.98 4.93 0 3.92 4.40 4.93 -304 -420 0
3.58 4.58 7.45 0 3.63 5.42 7.21 -58 -834 24
4.56 4.63 6.93 18 80 5.38 5.53 6.91 -817 -892 20
Show more
Table 2
Similar to Table 1, but for 19Na/19O
19Na 19O MED
Eexp EGSM ESM Eexp EGSM ESM EXP GSM SM
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0.12 0.64 0.83 0.10 0.71 0.81 24 -64 20
0.75 0.69 3.08 1.47 1.30 2.88 -727 -607 200
Show more
3

Results

Our GSM calculations accurately describe the excitation energies of the low-lying states for the mirror partners 18Ne/18O and 19Na/19O. To delve deeper into the significant mirror symmetry breaking observed in these mirror nuclei, we define the MED for a given state as , where and denote the negative and positive isospin projections , respectively, for a mirror pair. We have calculated MED values for mirror states in 18Ne/18O and 19Na/19O, as presented in Tables 1 and 2, along with experimental data. It is observed that in most states, the GSM-calculated MED values for low-lying states in the mirror partners 18Ne/18O and 19Na/19O align with the experimental data. Although the numerical differences in the excitation energies between the calculated and experimental values for some states are relatively large, they still exhibit the expected qualitative trend of MED. Meanwhile, the SM results are poor, demonstrating that coupling to continuum states plays an essential role in the study of mirror states bearing significant mirror symmetry breaking. However, an exception is noted for the state in the 18Ne/18O mirror nuclei, where our GSM calculations yield larger values than those of the experimental data. Both our GSM calculations and the experimental data highlight significant mirror symmetry breaking in the state of the 18Ne/18O mirror nuclei and the state of the 19Na/19O mirror nuclei, as evidenced by their large MED values.

To investigate the significant mirror symmetry breaking and the associated large MEDs, we began by calculating the average occupations of the low-lying states through the GSM. The focus is particularly on the s1/2 and d5/2 partial waves above the 16O core for the 18Ne/18O and 19Na/19O mirror nuclei, as shown in Figs. 1 and 2. Notably, other partial waves such as d3/2 and f5/2,7/2 exhibit negligible occupations and are, therefore, excluded from these figures. The calculated average occupations reveal almost identical patterns for the mirror states within the 18Ne/18O and 19Na/19O pairs. Our GSM calculations further indicate that states exhibiting significant mirror symmetry breaking with large MED values also show significant occupancy in the s1/2 partial waves, which are markedly higher than in their respective ground states. For instance, the occupations of the s1/2 partial wave for the and states in the 18Ne/18O and 19Na/19O mirror pairs, respectively, are substantially greater than those of their ground states. Additionally, our calculations show that the of 18Ne/18O demonstrates notable s1/2 partial wave occupations compared to the ground states, resulting in a large MED. In contrast, experimental data provide a smaller MED value, hinting at a complex structure of the states in 18Ne/18O that might not be fully captured by 16O plus valence particle picture.

Fig. 1
(Color online) The average occupation numbers for the s1/2 and d5/2 partial waves in the low-lying states of the 18Ne/18O mirror pair, calculated using the GSM above the 16O core
pic
Fig. 2
(Color online) Similar to Fig. 1, but for low-lying states in 19Na/19O
pic

Aligned with results from other theoretical frameworks, such as the standard shell model and the ab initio VS-IMSRG approach, our results indicate that the significant mirror symmetry breaking with large MEDs observed in mirror states stems primarily from the extensive occupation of the s1/2 partial waves, which are weakly bound or unbound in the proton-rich nucleus but deeply bound in its mirror neutron-rich nucleus, called TES. However, a deeper understanding of the mirror state bearing significant mirror symmetry breaking and a large MED value is lacking. The GSM is a suitable model that properly treats both the inter-nucleon correlations and continuum coupling to describe the properties of dripline nuclei, including a precise description of the many-body wave function in the asymptotic regions [44, 57, 59, 60].

To elucidate the underlying mechanism of large MEDs, we conducted a detailed analysis of the radial density distributions of mirror states in 18Ne/18O and 19Na/19O pairs using the GSM. The results allow us to systematically compare the radial distributions of valence protons in proton-rich nuclei and those of valence neutrons in their neutron-rich mirror counterparts. The results are shown in Figs. 3 and 4 for 18Ne/18O and 19Na/19O mirror partners, respectively. Our GSM results reveal that the states characterized by minor mirror symmetry breaking with small MEDs exhibit almost identical radial density distributions, which decline sharply in the asymptotic regions, such as the ground states of both 18Ne/18O and 19Na/19O. This phenomenon is largely attributed to the dominance of d5/2 partial waves, which are constrained within the nuclear region by high centrifugal and Coulomb barriers, despite the state being unbound. Conversely, GSM calculations depict the radial density distributions of the state of 18Ne and the state of 19Na as more extended in the asymptotic region than their neutron-rich counterparts 18O and 19O, respectively. This disparity stems from the non-existent centrifugal barrier for the s1/2 partial wave, leading to a more pronounced distribution in the proton-rich nucleus owing to the weakly bound or unbound nature of the s1/2 partial wave. A similar mechanism underlies the formation of halo nuclei, where the valence nucleons occupy weakly bound s- or p- partial waves, resulting in an extended density distribution owing to the minimal or absent centrifugal barrier [14, 49, 61]. In previous works, these exotic phenomena that result from the mechanism for the extension of the s- partial wave have been widely recognized. However, in reality, most theoretical models cannot directly provide the properties of this extension and its impact on physical phenomena when performing calculations, such as the results of our SM calculations within the single sd shell model space in Table 1, where the MEDs of all states for 18Ne/18O are quite small.

Fig. 3
(Color online) The calculated radial density distribution of valence protons and valence neutrons for low-lying mirror states in 18Ne/18O, respectively, above 16O inner core, using GSM
pic
Fig. 4
(Color online) Similar to Fig. 3, but for low-lying states in 19Na/19O
pic

However, mirror symmetry breaking can be calculated using the traditional SM by introducing further approximations and modifications. For example, traditional SM calculations using the USDC interaction give the MED of the mirror state of 19Na/19O as -225 keV, which is significantly smaller than the experimental data of -727 keV. Moreover, the MED of the mirror state of 19Na/19O is mainly caused by the difference in the optimized single-particle energy for valence protons and neutrons in the USDC interaction [28]. Nevertheless, since the calculated MED is significantly smaller than the experimental data, they simulated the TES arising from continuum coupling through , where the is spectroscopic factors of proton s1/2 orbital and TESsp is single-particle TES [28]. The approximate treatment of the TES provides the MED value of the mirror states close to the experimental data. Based on this, the relationship between TES and the extended s1/2 partial wave in the mirror partner was determined indirectly. However, SM calculations cannot provide a direct description of the TES. Moreover, phenomenological adjustments to the matrix elements related to the proton s1/2 orbital have also been employed in the SM to describe the indirect effects of weakly bound and unbound wave functions on eigenenergies. For nuclei, the strength of the effective SM interactions involving the loosely bound proton s1/2 orbit is significantly reduced in comparison with their mirror nuclei to calculate the significant mirror symmetry [12], in which the reduction factors of the two-body matrix elements related to the proton s1/2 orbital are evaluated using the Woods-Saxon potential. The large MEDs in 18Ne/18O and 19Na/19O are well reproduced.

Unlike the SM calculation introduced above with the aforementioned corrections, our GSM calculations provide a more self-consistent direct calculation of the radial density distribution, yielding the expected MEDs without relying on other corrections and modifications. Moreover, our calculations directly reveal that the mirror states demonstrating significant mirror symmetry breaking with large MEDs possess many-body wave functions in proton-rich nuclei that are more extended than those in their neutron-rich mirror states, which further helps us understand the role of mirror symmetry breaking in shaping their properties.

The GSM Hamiltonian, as shown in Eq. (1) can be divided into nuclear interactions (encompassing core-nucleons and nucleon-nucleon interactions) and Coulomb interactions (including one-body Coulomb (1BC) interactions between the inner core and valence protons and two-body Coulomb (2BC) interactions between valence protons). We performed further calculations to dissect the contributions from different parts of the Hamiltonian, aiming to shed light on the underlying mechanisms in mirror states exhibiting significant mirror symmetry breaking with a large MED.

The computed energies for the low-lying mirror states in the pairs 18Ne/18O and 19Na/19O, along with the experimental data [58], are shown in Figs. 5 and 6, respectively. To gain deeper insights, we also present the energy minus 2BC contribution (GSM-2BC) and energy minus 1BC and 2BC contributions (GSM-1BC-2BC) in proton-rich nuclei 18Ne and 19Na. Indeed, GSM-1BC-2BC also corresponds to the contribution of nuclear interactions. Within the isospin symmetry picture, the difference in mirror state energies should solely stem from Coulomb interactions, implying that the GSM-1BC-2BC values for a state in a proton-rich nucleus are the same as those for its mirror state in a neutron-rich nucleus.

Fig. 5
(Color online) Upper panel: calculated energies (GSM), energies minus the two-body Coulomb contribution (GSM-2BC), and energies minus one- and two-body Coulomb total contributions (GSM-1BC-2BC) of low-lying states of 18Ne using GSM, along with the energies of mirror states in 18O, with respect to the 16O inner core. The GSM results are also compared with the experimental data. Lower panel: the contribution for the calculated energy difference between the mirror states
pic
Fig. 6
(Color online) Similar to Fig. 5, but for low-lying states in 19Na/19O
pic

Our GSM calculation shows that the GSM-1BC-2BC values for the ground states of 18Ne and 19Na closely align with the computed ground-state energies of their neutron-rich counterparts, 18O and 19O, respectively. The results indicate the preservation of mirror symmetry in these ground states. Conversely, for the excited state in 18Ne/18O and the state in 19Na/19O, our GSM calculations showcase a deviation from this symmetry. To quantitatively examine this discrepancy, we introduced ΔE as the differential metric for significant mirror-symmetry breaking. ΔE encapsulates the disparity between the GSM-1BC-2BC values in the state of the proton-rich nucleus and the energy calculated for the corresponding state in the neutron-rich mirror nucleus, which read as . Here, Ψproton and Ψneutron correspond to the many-body wave functions of proton-rich and neutron-rich nuclei, respectively. The ΔE corresponds to the difference in the contribution of the nuclear interactions in the mirror state.

Our GSM calculations show that both ΔE and Coulomb interactions, including 1BC and 2BC, significantly influence the energy discrepancies observed in the mirror states. Predominantly, Coulomb interactions emerged as the dominant factor contributing to these differences. This is illustrated in the lower panels of Figs. 5 and 6, we detail the ΔE, 1BC, and 2BC contributions to the energy differences in the low-lying mirror states of 18Ne/18O and 19Na/19O mirror pairs. Our GSM results indicate that the energy differences in the ground states of 18Ne/18O primarily stem from Coulomb interactions, with ΔE contributing minimally. Furthermore, for 19Na/19O, the ΔE contribution was approximately 100 keV. Interestingly, we find varying contributions of ΔE, 1BC, and 2BC across different mirror states within each state. For instance, the states in 18Ne/18O exhibit a higher ΔE contribution and lower Coulomb interactions relative to their ground states. The heightened ΔE values underscore the distinct contributions of nuclear interactions to mirror-symmetry breaking in these systems, showcasing the complex interplay of forces that shape the energy landscapes of mirror nuclei.

In evaluating the MED, the ground-state energy of the mirror nuclei serves as the baseline, with the MED being determined by the discrepancy in the excitation energies of the corresponding mirror states. The energy difference of the ground states of the mirror nuclei was adopted as a reference, as illustrated by the red dashed lines in Figs. 5 and 6. The difference between the values of the ground and excited mirror states corresponds to the MED, highlighted by red arrows in these figures. The results revealed that both the ΔE values and Coulomb interaction exhibited significant variations across different mirror states, both contributing to the MED.

Furthermore, to validate our conclusion, we performed Gamow shell model calculations using an optimized Hamiltonian fitted to reproduce a series of selected experimental data for sd shell nuclei. Moreover, the optimized Hamiltonian has been employed to investigate the low-lying states in 21Al [62]and 22Si [63], as well as isospin symmetry breaking in these nuclei. Although the calculated excitation energies exhibited slight differences, the MED results aligned with both the current GSM calculations and the established conclusions regarding the MED mechanism.

4

Summary

Based on the GSM calculations, in which both the inter-nucleon correlation and continuum coupling are properly treated, we deduce that significant mirror symmetry breaking in mirror states, leading to large MED values, arises from the occupation of weakly bound or unbound s1/2 partial waves in the proton-rich nucleus, while its counterpart in the neutron-rich nucleus remains deeply bound. This dichotomy culminates in a more expansive radial density distribution for states within the proton-rich nucleus than for their mirror counterparts. Additionally, the difference in the radial density distributions between the mirror states implies disparate contributions from nuclear interactions, underscored by significant ΔE values, which further highlights the presence of mirror symmetry breaking. Moreover, states with an extended radial density distribution tend to yield smaller Coulomb contributions than ground states characterized by more localized distributions. This factor chiefly accounts for the reduced excitation energies in states influenced by the Thomas-Ehrman shift effect, thereby engendering substantial negative MED values in mirror states. Our GSM calculations corroborate that both nuclear and Coulomb interactions play crucial roles in manifesting the significant mirror-symmetry breaking associated with significant MED values.

References
1.I. Tanihata, H. Savajols, R. Kanungo,

Recent experimental progress in nuclear halo structure studies

. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 68, 215313 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppnp.2012.07.001
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
2.E. Lunderberg, P. A. DeYoung, Z. Kohley, et al.,

Evidence for the ground-state resonance of 26O

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 142503 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.142503
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
3.A. H. Wuosmaa, J. P. Schiffer, K. E. Rehm, et al.,

Structure of 7He by proton removal from 8Li with the (d3He) reaction

. Phys. Rev. C 78, 041302 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.78.041302
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
4.M. T. Wan, L. Ou, M. Liu, et al.,

Properties of the drip-line nucleus and mass relation of mirror nuclei

. Nucl. Sci. Tech. 36, 26 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41365-024-01633-9
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
5.L. Zhou, S. M. Wang, D. Q. Fang, et al.,

Recent progress in two-proton radioactivity

. Nucl. Sci. Tech. 33, 105 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41365-022-01091-1
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
6.R. G. Thomas,

An analysis of the energy levels of the mirror nuclei, 13C and 13N

. Phys. Rev. 88, 11091125 (1952). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.88.1109
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
7.J. B. Ehrman,

On the displacement of corresponding energy levels of 13C and 13N

. Phys. Rev. 81, 412416 (1951). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.81.412
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
8.K. A. Chipps, D. W. Bardayan, J. C. Blackmon, et al.,

First direct measurement of the 17F(p, γ)18Ne cross section

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 152502 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.152502
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
9.J. Lee, X. X. Xu, K. Kaneko, et al.,

Large isospin asymmetry in 22Si/22O mirror Gamow–Teller transitions reveals the halo structure of 22Al

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 192503 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.192503
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
10.M. Z. Sun, Y. Yu, X. P. Wang, et al.,

Ground-state mass of 22Al and test of state-of-the-art ab initio calculations

. Chinese Phys. C 48, 034002 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/ad1a0a
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
11.H. H. Li, Q. Yuan, J. G. Li, et al.,

Investigation of isospin-symmetry breaking in mirror energy difference and nuclear mass with ab initio calculations

. Phys. Rev. C 107, 014302 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.107.014302
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
12.C. X. Yuan, C. Qi, F. R. Xu, et al.,

Mirror energy difference and the structure of loosely bound proton-rich nuclei around A=20

. Phys. Rev. C 89, 044327 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.89.044327
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
13.I. Stefan, F. de Oliveira Santos, O. Sorlin, et al.,

Probing nuclear forces beyond the drip line using the mirror nuclei 16N and 16F

. Phys. Rev. C 90, 014307 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.90.014307
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
14.J. G. Li, N. Michel, H. H. Li, et al.,

One-neutron halo structure of 29Ne

. Phys. Lett. B 832, 137225 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2022.137225
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
15.X. Mao, J. Rotureau, W. Nazarewicz, et al.,

Gamow-shell-model description of Li isotopes and their mirror partners

. Phys. Rev. C 102, 024309 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.102.024309
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
16.N. Michel, J. G. Li, L. H. Ru, et al.,

Calculation of the Thomas–Ehrman shift in 16F and 15O(p, p) cross sections within the Gamow shell model

. Phys. Rev. C 106, L011301 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.106.L011301
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
17.K. Way,

Elementary Theory of Nuclear Shell Structure

. Science 122, 603 (1955). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.122.3170.603.b
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
18.E. Caurier, G. Martínez-Pinedo, F. Nowacki, et al.,

The shell model as a unified view of nuclear structure

. Rev. Mod. Phys. 77, 427488 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.77.427
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
19.F. Ajzenberg-Selove,

Energy levels of light nuclei A=5–10

. Nucl. Phys. A 490, 1225 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1016/0375-9474(88)90124-8
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
20.P. Campbell, I. D. Moore, M. R. Pearson,

Laser spectroscopy for nuclear structure physics

. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 86, 127180 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppnp.2015.09.003
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
21.J. G. Li, B. S. Hu, S. Zhang, et al.,

Unbound 28O, the heaviest oxygen isotope observed: a cutting-edge probe for testing nuclear models

. Nucl. Sci. Tech. 35, 21 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41365-024-01373-w
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
22.C. Angulo, G. Tabacaru, M. Couder, et al.,

Identification of a new low-lying state in the proton drip line nucleus 19Na

. Phys. Rev. C 67, 014308 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.67.014308
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
23.S. Zhang, Y. Z. Ma, J. G. Li, et al.,

The roles of three-nucleon force and continuum coupling in mirror-symmetry breaking of the oxygen mass region

. Phys. Lett. B 827, 136958 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2022.136958
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
24.M. A. Bentley, S. M. Lenzi,

Coulomb energy differences between high-spin states in isobaric multiplets

. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 59, 497561 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppnp.2006.10.001
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
25.A. P. Zuker, S. M. Lenzi, G. Martínez-Pinedo, et al.,

Isobaric multiplet yrast energies and isospin nonconserving forces

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 142502 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.89.142502
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
26.K. Kaneko, Y. Sun, T. Mizusaki, et al.,

Variation in displacement energies due to isospin-nonconserving forces

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 172505 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.172505
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
27.Y. H. Lam, N. A. Smirnova, E. Caurier,

Isospin nonconservation in sd-shell nuclei

. Phys. Rev. C 87, 054304 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.87.054304
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
28.A. Magilligan, B. A. Brown,

New isospin-breaking “USD” Hamiltonians for the sd shell

. Phys. Rev. C 101, 064312 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.101.064312
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
29.P. Bączyk, J. Dobaczewski, M. Konieczka, et al.,

Isospin-symmetry breaking in masses of N≃Z nuclei

. Phys. Lett. B 778, 178183 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2017.12.068
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
30.R. D. O. Llewellyn, M. A. Bentley, R. Wadsworth, et al.,

Establishing the maximum collectivity in highly deformed N=Z nuclei

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 152501 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.152501
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
31.J. G. Li, N. Michel, W. Zuo, et al.,

Resonances of A=4, T=1 isospin triplet states within the ab initio no-core Gamow shell model

. Phys. Rev. C 104, 024319 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.104.024319
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
32.M. S. Martin, S. R. Stroberg, J. D. Holt, et al.,

Testing isospin symmetry breaking in ab initio nuclear theory

. Phys. Rev. C 104, 014324 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.104.014324
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
33.E. Caurier, P. Navrátil, W. E. Ormand, et al.,

Ab initio shell model for A=10 nuclei

. Phys. Rev. C 66, 024314 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.66.024314
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
34.J. G. Li, H. H. Li, S. Zhang, et al.,

Double-magicity of proton drip-line nucleus 22Si with ab initio calculation

. Phys. Lett. B 846, 138197 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2023.138197
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
35.S. Uthayakumaar, M. A. Bentley, E. C. Simpson, et al.,

Spectroscopy of the T=32A=47 and A=45 mirror nuclei via one- and two-nucleon knockout reactions

. Phys. Rev. C 106, 024327 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.106.024327
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
36.H. H. Li, J. G. Li, M. R. Xie, et al.,

Ab initio calculations of mirror energy difference in sd-shell nuclei

. Chin. Phys. C 47, 124101 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/acf035
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
37.R. Id Betan, R. J. Liotta, N. Sandulescu, et al.,

Two-particle resonant states in a many-body mean field

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 042501 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.89.042501
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
38.N. Michel, W. Nazarewicz, M. Płoszajczak, et al.,

Gamow shell model description of neutron-rich nuclei

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 042502 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.89.042502
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
39.N. Michel, W. Nazarewicz, M. Płoszajczak, et al.,

Shell model in the complex energy plane

. J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 36, 013101 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/36/1/013101
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
40.N. Michel, M. Płoszajczak, in Gamow Shell Model, The Unified Theory of Nuclear Structure and Reactions (Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, 2021), pp. 1514. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-69356-5
41.J. G. Li, B. S. Hu, Q. Wu, et al.,

Neutron-rich calcium isotopes within realistic Gamow shell model calculations with continuum coupling

. Phys. Rev. C 102, 034302 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.102.034302
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
42.H. H. Li, J. G. Li, N. Michel, et al.,

Investigation of unbound hydrogen isotopes with the Gamow shell model

. Phys. Rev. C 104, L061306 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.104.L061306
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
43.J. G. Li, Y. Z. Ma, N. Michel, et al.,

Recent progress in Gamow shell model calculations of drip line nuclei

. Physics 3, 977997 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/physics3040062
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
44.J. G. Li, N. Michel, W. Zuo, et al.,

Unbound spectra of neutron-rich oxygen isotopes predicted by the Gamow shell model

. Phys. Rev. C 103, 034305 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.103.034305
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
45.S. Zhang, F. R. Xu, J. G. Li, et al.,

Ab initio descriptions of A=16 mirror nuclei with resonance and continuum coupling

. Phys. Rev. C 108, 064316 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.108.064316
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
46.T. Berggren,

On the use of resonant states in eigenfunction expansions of scattering and reaction amplitudes

. Nucl. Phys. A 109, 265287 (1968). https://doi.org/10.1016/0375-9474(68)90593-9
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
47.N. Michel, H. M. Aktulga, Y. Jaganathen,

Toward scalable many-body calculations for nuclear open quantum systems using the Gamow shell model

. Comput. Phys. Commun. 247, 106978 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2019.106978
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
48.Y. Suzuki, K. Ikeda,

Cluster-orbital shell model and its application to the He isotopes

. Phys. Rev. C 38, 410413 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.38.410
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
49.G. Papadimitriou, A. T. Kruppa, N. Michel, et al.,

Charge radii and neutron correlations in helium halo nuclei

. Phys. Rev. C 84, 051304(R) (2011). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.84.051304
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
50.Y. Jaganathen, R. M. Id Betan, N. Michel, et al.,

Quantified Gamow shell model interaction for psd-shell nuclei

. Phys. Rev. C 96, 054316 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.96.054316
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
51.H. W. Hammer, A. Nogga, A. Schwenk,

Colloquium: Three-body forces: From cold atoms to nuclei

. Rev. Mod. Phys. 85, 197217 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.85.197
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
52.H. W. Hammer, S. König, U. van Kolck,

Nuclear effective field theory: Status and perspectives

. Rev. Mod. Phys. 92, 025004 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.92.025004
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
53.S. Binder, A. Ekström, G. Hagen, et al.,

Effective field theory in the harmonic oscillator basis

. Phys. Rev. C 93, 044332 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.93.044332
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
54.R. J. Furnstahl, G. Hagen, T. Papenbrock,

Corrections to nuclear energies and radii in finite oscillator spaces

. Phys. Rev. C 86, 031301(R) (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.86.031301
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
55.A. Bansal, S. Binder, A. Ekström, et al.,

Pion-less effective field theory for atomic nuclei and lattice nuclei

. Phys. Rev. C 98, 054301 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.98.054301
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
56.L. Huth, V. Durant, J. Simonis, et al.,

Shell-model interactions from chiral effective field theory

. Phys. Rev. C 98, 044301 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.98.044301
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
57.N. Michel, J. G. Li, F. R. Xu, et al.,

Description of proton-rich nuclei in the A≈20 region within the Gamow shell model

. Phys. Rev. C 100, 064303 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.100.064303
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
58.http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/ensdf
59.M. R. Xie, J. G. Li, N. Michel, et al.,

Investigation of spectroscopic factors of deeply-bound nucleons in drip-line nuclei with the Gamow shell model

. Phys. Lett. B 839, 137800 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2023.137800
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
60.M. R. Xie, J. G. Li, N. Michel, et al.,

Spectroscopic factors of resonance states with the Gamow shell model

. Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy 67, 212011 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11433-023-2227-5
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
61.N. Michel, J. G. Li, F. R. Xu, et al.,

Two-neutron halo structure of 31F

. Phys. Rev. C 101, 031301(R) (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.101.031301
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
62.K. H. Li, N. Chen, J. G. Li, et al.,

Gamow shell model calculations for the Thomas–Ehrman shift in the new isotope 21Al

. Phys. Rev. C 111, 034327 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.111.034327
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
63.Y. M. Xing, Y. F. Luo, Y. H. Zhang, et al.,

Z=14 magicity revealed by the mass of the proton dripline nucleus 22Si

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 012501 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1103/ffwt-n7yc
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
Footnote

Chun-Wang Ma is an editorial board member/editor-in-chief for Nuclear Science and Techniques and was not involved in the editorial review, or the decision to publish this article. All authors declare that there are no competing interests.