logo

Intrinsic background radiation of LaBr3(Ce) detector via coincidence measurements and simulations

NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH

Intrinsic background radiation of LaBr3(Ce) detector via coincidence measurements and simulations

Hao Cheng
Bao-Hua Sun
Li-Hua Zhu
Tian-Xiao Li
Guang-Shuai Li
Cong-Bo Li
Xiao-Guang Wu
Yun Zheng
Nuclear Science and TechniquesVol.31, No.10Article number 99Published in print 01 Oct 2020Available online 09 Oct 2020
38104

The LaBr3(Ce) detector has attracted much attention in recent years because of its superior characteristics compared with other scintillating materials in terms of resolution and efficiency. However, it has a relatively high intrinsic background radiation because of the naturally occurring radioisotopes in lanthanum, actinium, and their daughter nuclei. This limits its applications in low-counting rate experiments. In this study, we identified the radioactive isotopes in the ϕ3" × 3" Saint-Gobain B380 detector by a coincidence measurement using a Clover detector in a low-background shielding system. Moreover, we carried out a Geant4 simulation of the experimental spectra to evaluate the activities of the main internal radiation components. The total activity of the background radiation of B380 is determined to be 1.523 (34) Bq/cm3. The main sources include 138La at 1.428 (34) Bq/cm3, 207Tl at 0.0135 (13) Bq/cm3, 211Bi at 0.0136 (15) Bq/cm3, 215Po at 0.0135 (3) Bq/cm3, 219Rn at 0.0125 (12) Bq/cm3, 223Fr at 0.0019 (11) Bq/cm3, 223Ra at 0.0127 (10) Bq/cm3, 227Th at 0.0158 (22) Bq/cm3, and 227Ac at 0.0135 (13) Bq/cm3. Of these, the activities of 207Tl, 211Po, 215Po, 223Fr, and 227Ac are deduced for the first time from the secular equilibrium established in the decay chain of 227Ac.

Video Abstract

LaBr3(Ce) detectorCoincidence measurement techniqueIntrinsic radiationGEANT4 simulation

1 Introduction

As a new type of inorganic scintillator, the LaBr3(Ce) crystal has a high density of 5.08 g/cm3, a high light output of approximately 63 photons/keVγ, a fast decay time of approximately 16 ns [1], and a good temperature response. These superior characteristics make LaBr3(Ce) ideal for many applications [2-6] in environmental monitoring, oil well logging, nuclear safeguards, and medical imaging. Thus, LaBr3(Ce) is often used as a substitute for the widely used NaI(TI) crystal when high performance is required. The integrated LaBr3(Ce) detector consists of a crystal coupled directly to a photomultiplier tube (PMT). Previous studies of LaBr3(Ce) detectors [1, 7-14] show excellent linearity in the γ ray response, a good energy resolution of less than 3% (FWHM) for the 662 keV γ ray for a size of up to ϕ3" 3", and an excellent time resolution of approximately 300 ps (FWHM). The latter has made possible a fast timing detector array composed of LaBr3(Ce) [15, 16] that is pursued worldwide for nuclear structure studies.

Conversely, the LaBr3(Ce) detector has a relatively high intrinsic background radiation [11, 17-21], which is typically at least 1 to 2 orders of magnitude higher than that of the NaI(Tl) detector. The self-radiation root in 138La and the five short-lived progeny of 227Ac impurities may cause a non-negligible effect in the energy spectrum as a result. This would seriously limit its application in low-count rate experiments such as those with space γ rays. Therefore, it is valuable to quantify the intrinsic radiation of LaBr3(Ce) and to understand its influence.

The present study aims to identify the components of internal radiation in LaBr3(Ce) and to deduce their activities. The detector of interest is the Saint-Gobain B380 with a size of ϕ3" 3". This experiment is performed by combining coincidence measurement with dedicated Geant4 simulation. The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 presents the coincidence measurement of LaBr3(Ce) vs. a Clover detector, and the corresponding results. In Sec. 3, we performed Geant4 simulations of the experimental spectra of both LaBr3(Ce) and the Clover detector, and we deduce the activity of 138La, 221Bi, 219Rn, 223Ra, and 227Th. A summary is provided in Sec. 4.

2 Internal radiation of LaBr3(Ce) and coincidence measurement

2.1 Internal radiation of LaBr3(Ce) detector

The internal radiation in the LaBr3(Ce) crystal has two origins: the naturally occurring radioisotope 138La and the 227Ac impurity. Together, they can decrease the detection sensitivity of γ rays with energies up to approximately 2.5 MeV. A better understanding of self-activity is essential for designing experiments.

138La is the only naturally occurring radioactive isotope of lanthanum, with 0.09% abundance and a half-life of 1.05 × 1011 years, which affects the energy spectrum below 1.5 MeV. 138La decays in two parallel processes, as shown in Fig. 1. 34.4% of the isotope undergoes β- decay, with a maximum energy of 263 keV, eventually to the first excitation state of 138Ce. This process is associated with the emission of a 788.742-keV γ ray. The remaining 65.6% of 138La disintegrates by electronic capture (EC). This process results in stable 138Ba with the emission of a 1435.795-keV γ ray and the characteristic X-rays of Ba with energies ranging from 31 to 38 keV.

Fig. 1.
Decay scheme of 138La. Data are from NNDC [22].
pic

227Ac is the grand-daughter nuclide in the 235U decay chain. Because of its similarity in chemistry to lanthanum, it presents as a contaminator with a half-life of 21.77 in LaBr3(Ce). Fig. 2 shows the decay chain down to the stable 207Pb by emitting α, β, and γ rays. This includes 6 α emitters (227Ac, 227Th, 223Ra, 219Rn, 215Po, and 211Bi) and 4 β emitters (227Ac, 211Pb, 211Bi, and 207Tl). 227Ac and its daughter nuclei produce a higher energy background by emitting α particles, and they also contribute to the β continuum up to approximately 1400 keV as a result of the β decay of 211Pb and 207Tl in the decay chain of this nucleus.

Fig. 2.
Actinide decay chain. The half-life, energies of α and characteristic γ rays with relatively high intensities, and β-decay end-point energy for each nuclide. Data are from NNDC [22].
pic
2.2 Experimental setup

Coincidence measurement using an HPGe was conducted in a low-background counting system (LBS). The environmental background counting rate was 58 per second. The LBS is a cylinder with a radius of 64 cm and a height of 66.1 cm, and it consists of four layers: iron, lead, copper, and plexiglass, from the outside to the inside. A schematic diagram of the entire detection system is shown in Fig. 3. The lead layer can shield most of the low-energy environment background, and the purpose of the copper layer is to absorb the characteristic X-rays of lead.

Fig. 3.
(Color online) Schematic diagram of experimental setup. It contains LaBr3 and Clover crystals and a low-background shielding room. The shielding room is composed of plexiglass, copper, lead, and iron from the inside to the outside. The LaBr3 detector is supported by a bracket in a shielded room.
pic

The LaBr3(Ce) detector is the Saint-Gobain B380 with a ϕ3" ×3" crystal. A high-purity germanium (HPGe) Clover detector from Canberra was placed directly facing the LaBr3(Ce). The high voltage applied to the LaBr3(Ce) detector was set to 520 V. A higher voltage may cause electron saturation in the photomultiplier, affecting linearity [23] in the energy determination. The Clover consists of four coaxial N-type high-purity germanium detectors, each with a diameter of 60 mm and length of 60 mm. The energy resolutions for the LaBr3(Ce) and Clover were measured to be 2.1% (FWHM) and 0.166% (FHWM) for a 1.332-MeV γ ray, respectively. The relative efficiency was 38% for each germanium crystal.

The energy and time signals of the two detectors were acquired using the VME data acquisition system and collected for 37,187 s in total. Dead time correction and time stamps were added to the data acquisition software. Standard radioactive sources 60Co, 137Cs, and 241Am were used for the γ-ray energy calibration up to approximately 1.33 MeV. The calibration accuracy was cross-checked using the characteristic γ-rays of 138La. Moreover, to calibrate the high-energy spectrum of LaBr3(Ce), we used the recoil-electron energies from the Compton scattering process of 2.615-MeV γ rays of 208Tl, a naturally radioactive nuclide in an environmental background. Such calibration is only possible using the coincidence measurement with Clover.

2.3 Coincidence measurement

The intrinsic radiation of the LaBr3(Ce) scintillator was identified by coincidence measurement using the LaBr3(Ce) and Clover detectors. The relevant background spectra after energy calibration are shown in Fig. 4. In the self-counting spectrum of LaBr3(Ce), we first see a low-energy peak centered at approximately 35.5 keV. This is attributed to the sum of 95.6% of the 31.83 keV Kα X-ray response and 90 % of the 5.6 keV Auger electron response in the EC decay process, by referring to the theoretical calculation [20]. The energy shift is due to the non-proportional response of the LaBr3(Ce) crystal. Then, we see a β continuum with an end point of 263 keV mixed with the Compton continua, primarily from the 788.7 and 1435.8 keV of 138La and the 1460.8 keV of 40K. With increasing energy, the 788.7 keV bump is shown to extend to higher energies and end at approximately 1 MeV. This is due to the coincidence of the 788.7-keV γ with the β- continuum. The 1435.8-keV γ-rays produced by the EC of 138La coincided with the 32-keV X-rays of 138Ba and the 1460.8-keV γ-rays of 40K, resulting in a double peak near 1461 keV, as shown in Fig. 4(a).

Fig. 4.
(Color online) Background radiation spectra measured for 37,187 s by the LaBr3(Ce) detector (a) and the Clover (b). The coincidence β spectrum (red) and X-ray spectrum (green) in the LaBr3(Ce) detector are shown in (a). The coincidence spectrum (red) and environmental background spectrum (black) of the Clover are shown in (b). For details, refer to the text.
pic

The spectrum above 1.8 MeV shows a three-peak structure, revealing the presence of α emitter contaminants. Although the α energies from 227Ac and its daughter nuclei are as high as 5.07.4 MeV (see Fig. 2), the energies are read out in the spectrum calibrated with γ-rays to be in the energy range of 1.5 and 2.5 MeV because of the well-known light quenching effect (see, for example Ref. [18]).

The energy spectrum of the Clover detector, as well as the coincidence spectrum, are shown in Fig. 4(b). It is clear that the characteristic γ-rays of 788.7 keV and 1435.8 keV of 138La decays were enhanced and the environmental background was further reduced in the coincidence spectrum. Setting gates in the Clover spectrum at 788.7 keV and 1435.8 keV of 138Ba decays allows us to pick up the β spectrum and the X-ray spectrum in the LaBr3(Ce) detector, as shown in Fig. 4(a)].The coincidence β spectrum has triggered a precise study of 138La decay [20, 24-27], which is a second forbidden unique decay. The β and X-ray distributions are shown for comparison in the LaBr3(Ce) spectrum.

Part of the coincidence events in the Clover and LaBr3(Ce) detectors are displayed in Fig. 5, while the projection to the Clover is shown in Fig. 6. The horizontal bands in Fig. 5 are traced back to the α-γ cascades. The correlated γ ray energies and their relative intensities are key to identifying the α emitters.

Fig. 5.
(Color online) Matrix of the LaBr3(Ce) vs. Clover. Listed are also the events of α-γ correlations and the identified radioactive isotopes. Both detectors were calibrated with characteristic γ-rays. The events between 1.5 and 2.4 MeV for LaBr33(Ce) correspond to 5-7.4 MeV α particles of the 227Ac decay chain. See the text for details.
pic
Fig. 6.
Projected γ-ray energy spectrum of Fig. 5 in the Clover. Labeled are the identified nuclei.
pic

The α emitters identified by the γ-α coincidence are 227Th, 223Ra, 219Rn, and 211Bi. This is consistent with previous investigations of LaBr3(Ce) with a size of ϕ1" ×1" [9] and LaCl3(Ce) with a size of ϕ25mm × 25mm) [17]. The main γ-rays and α emitted by 227Th, 223Ra, 219Rn, and 211Bi are shown in Table 1. Some α values listed in the table cannot be seen in Fig. 5 because their branches are relatively low. The α (6.038 MeV from 227Th, 6.62 MeV from 211Bi, and 6.82 MeV from 219Rn) with relatively high intensity cannot be seen in Fig. 5 because the parent nucleus decays to the ground state of the daughter nucleus. The third peak in the single spectrum of LaBr3(Ce) in Fig. 4(a) is the 7.386 MeV α line from the ground state of 215Po to the ground state of 211Pb, in which there is no cascade γ-ray.

Table 1.
α-γ coincidences identified in 227Th, 223Ra, 219Rn, and 211Bi. Listed are the αEγEα and whether it is present in Fig. 5. and are the energies of the γ ray and coincident α, respectively
Isotope αEγEα (keV) Shown in Fig. 5.
227Th α2365757
227Th α2565757
227Th α2865757
227Th α3005713
227Th α3295713
227Th α615977 /
227Th α3345709 /
223Ra α1445716
223Ra α1545716
223Ra α2705607
223Ra α3245540
223Ra α3385540
223Ra α4455434
223Ra α1275747 /
219Rn α4026425
219Rn α2716553 /
219Rn α4026425 /
211Bi α3516278
Show more

3 Discussion

In this section, we will deduce the activity of various radioactive contaminations embedded in LaBr3(Ce). Because radioactive contaminants are evenly distributed in the crystal, it is practically impossible to make a direct determination because of the lack of accurate efficiency calibration for both detectors.

Instead, in this work, we develop a Monte Carlo model based on the Geant4 version 10.4 [28-30] toolkit. The setup includes the Clover, the LaBr3(Ce) detector as well as its bracket, and all components of the shielding system, as shown in Fig. 3. 138La isotopes are evenly distributed in the ϕ3" ×3" cylindrical LaBr3 crystal. The density of the LaBr3 (Ce) crystal was set to 5.08 g/cm3 [1]. We employed the physics constructor class of G4EmStandardPhysics [30]. It includes various processes, such as the deposition of β and γ rays in the sensitive volumes of the detectors, the occurrence of Compton scattering in the shield, and the characteristic X-rays induced from the shield material. The shielding materials are summarized in Table 2. The activities of 138La and 227Ac decay chain contaminators were determined by reproducing the experimental spectra in both the LaBr3(Ce) and Clover detectors.

Table 2.
Details of shielding materials of the LBS. The material layer, inner radius, outer radius, and materials defined in Geant4 are listed.
Layer Inner radius (cm) Outer radius (cm) Material
Iron 30 32 G4_Fe
Lead 21.65 30 G4_Pb
Copper 21.45 21.65 G4_Cu
Plexiglass 20.95 21.45 G4_PLEXIGLASS
Show more
3.1 Simulation of the self-counting LaBr3(Ce)

We compare the simulation with the experimental data acquired at the same measurement time, that is, 37,187 s. The best fit to the experimental spectrum is found using the least squares method when the activity of 138La 482(19) Bq corresponds to 1.396 (55) Bq/cm3. This corresponds to 180,030,639 decays of 138La over 37,187 s in total. The uncertainty quoted here is due to the experimental statistics, detection efficiency, and branching ratio of the γ-rays. The experimental and simulated spectra are plotted in Fig. 7. Good agreement is seen, except for the low-energy part up to approximately 150 keV. To reproduce the experimental spectrum, we adopted the following function [31] for the γ-ray energy () resolution (η):

Fig. 7.
(Color online) Comparison of experimental (black line) and simulated (red line) self-counting energy spectra in the LaBr3 detector. The sampling of simulation was scaled to the experimental data collected for 37,187 s.
pic
ln(η)=12×ln(Eγ)3.82 (1)

It should be noted that in the above simulation, we did not consider the contribution from 227Ac and its daughter nuclei. This may partially account for the difference between the simulation and experimental spectra. Another possible reason for the low-energy deficiency in the simulation could be insufficient understanding of the β decay of 138La. This has been discussed in Ref. [24-27].

3.2 Activities determined using the Clover data

An alternative way to deduce the 138La activity is to use the coincidence γ ray information at 788.7 and 1435.8 keV in Clover. This would require an accurate efficiency calibration of the Clover detector using a volume source of the same volume as the LaBr3(Ce) detector, which is practically impossible.

In reality, we performed a two-step optimization of the calibration [32]. In step one, we followed the standard routine for efficiency calibration using the standard radioactive point sources 137Cs, 241Am, 54Mn, 88Y, 109Cd, 65Zn, and 152Eu. These sources are selected to avoid a possible true summing effect. The point source was placed 3 cm from the front surface of the Clover detector. We used the EFFIT program in the software package [33] to describe the efficiency curve for the low-energy and high-energy regions separately.

In this step, we optimized the thickness of the dead layer encapsulating the crystal by the least squares method to best reproduce the Clover spectrum of 152Eu. The best simulation results of the 152Eu spectrum together with the experimental data are presented in Fig. 8(a). The simulated detection efficiency curve was compared with the experimental results using a standard point source, as shown in Fig. 9.

Fig. 8.
(Color online) Comparison of Clover spectrum (black line) with simulation (red line) for a 152Eu source (a) and LaBr3(Ce) crystals (b). The sampling of the simulation for LaBr3(Ce) was scaled to the experimental data collected for 37,187 s
pic
Fig. 9.
(Color online) γ-ray detection efficiencies of Clover. The red dashed line is the fitting curve for the experimental data (solid triangle) from the standard point source, while the black dashed line is the simulation efficiency under the same detection configuration. The black solid line represents the detection efficiency when the source is evenly distributed in the LaBr3(Ce) crystal.
pic

In step two, we modeled the detection efficiency of the Clover with sources evenly distributed in the LaBr3(Ce) crystal, instead of point sources. The simulated efficiency curve is shown in Fig. 9. The efficiency of 788.7 keV and 1435.8 keV γ-rays were determined to be 0.00347(11) and 0.00257(10), respectively. In the simulation, the interaction of characteristic γ-rays with both the LaBr3(Ce) and Clover detectors and even the shielding material were taken into account.

As a result, we found that the Clover spectrum collected for 37,187 s is best reproduced when the total count of the 788.7-keV γ-ray is 22,423 (164). The simulation and experimental data are shown in Fig. 8(b). The activity of 138La is thus extracted to be 504 (16) Bq, corresponding to 1.451 (58) Bq/cm3. The uncertainty takes into account the contributions from the statistics, detection efficiency, and branching ratio of the γ-rays in the decay of 138La. In the same way, the activity of 138La was also deduced from the 1435.8-keV γ-ray to be 500 (20) Bq, corresponding to 1.437 (63) Bq/cm3. Both are consistent with those determined from the self-counting of the LaBr3(Ce) detector, as shown in Table 3. In fact, the activity of 138La in the LaBr3(Ce) B380 detector can be estimated according to the natural abundance of 138La, 0.08881(71)% [22], and its half-life T1/2=1.051011a. The activity amounts to 1.456 (40) Bq/cm3. This is in good agreement with our measurements.

Table 3.
Activities of 227Ac decay chain contaminators and 138La. The isotopes are the most distinct γ rays according to the deduced activities. Results from Refs. [17, 21] are shown whenever available.
Isotope γ-energy (keV) Absolute efficiency (%) Activity (Bq/cm3) Reference value (Bq/cm3)
211Bi 351.1 0.4347 1.3610-2(15) 0.032 a
219Rn 271.2 0.4117 1.3410-2(17) /
219Rn 401.8 0.4317 1.1610-2(16) 0.032a
Average of 219Rn 1.2510-2(12) /
223Ra 269.5 0.4130 1.2610-2(13) 0.025a
223Ra 445.0 0.4283 1.2710-2(15) /
Average of 223Ra 1.2710-2(10) /
227Th 236.0 0.3840 1.5810-2(22) 0.037a
Sum activity of the above α contaminators 5.4510-2(30)
207Tl / / 1.3510-2(13) /
211Po / / 3.7910-5(36) /
215Po / / 1.3510-2(13) /
223Fr / / 1.910-4(11) /
227Ac / / 1.3510-2(13) /
138La 788.7 0.3467 1.451(58)
138La 1435.8 0.2567 1.437(63)
138La Self-counting method 1.396(55) /
Average activity of 138La 1.428(34) 1.530(70)b
Total activity 1.523(34) /
Show more
[a] Date from Ref. [17],
[b] Date from Ref. [21],

The above procedure can also be applied to evaluate the activities of the 227Ac decay chain contaminators. In Fig. 6, we identified the characteristic γ-rays at 351.1 keV (211Bi), 271.2 keV and 401.8 keV (219Rn), 269.5 keV and 445.0 keV (223Ra), and 236.0 keV (227Th). The activities of 211Bi, 219Rn, 223Ra, and 227Th are 0.0136 (15) Bq/cm3, 0.0125 (12) Bq/cm3, 0.0127 (10) Bq/cm3, and 0.0158 (22) Bq/cm3, respectively.

The half-life of the parent radionuclide 227Ac is much longer than the half-life of the daughter radionuclide in the Ac-decay chain. In principle, secular equilibrium should occur, namely, the activities A of each emitter should be equal:

A=λ1N1=λ2N2=λ3N3.... (2)

where λi and Ni are the decay constant and the number of nuclear species i, respectively. Indeed, as shown in Fig. 10, the activities of 211Bi, 219Rn, 223Ra, and 227Th agree well within the error bars. Here, the decay branchings of the 227Ac and 211Bi decay were taken into account. The average activity was computed to be 0.0135(13) Bq/cm3. The secular equilibrium allows us to determine the activities of all nuclei in the decay chain, namely, 207Tl, 211Po, 215Po, 223Fr, and 227Ac as 1.3510-2(13), 3.7910-5(36), 1.3510-2(13), 1.910-4(11), and 1.3510-2(13), respectively. The results are summarized in Table 3.

Fig. 10.
Activities of 221Bi, 219Rn, 223Ra, and 227Th deduced from the α-γ coincidence experiment. The average value and relevant uncertainty are indicated by the shaded area.
pic

We included all of the α emitters in the decay chain, as discussed above, into the Geant4 code, and simulated the 37,187-s energy spectrum. The quenching effect of the α particles and recoil nuclei in the scintillator is not included because of the lack of precise calibration. The results are shown in Fig. 11. The energy resolution of each alpha particle was assumed to be 6%.

Fig. 11.
(Color line) (a) Simulated alpha energy spectrum of the LaBr3(Ce) detector. The contributions from each isotope are labeled. (b) High-energy part of the experimental spectrum. The simulation was scaled to an experimental duration of 37,187 s.
pic

One can easily identify a similar pattern of simulations for the experimental high-energy spectrum. This verifies the 227Ac contribution to the energy spectrum of 4.5 MeV to 5.2 MeV, 223Ra and 227Th to the spectrum of 5.2 MeV to 6.5 MeV, 211Bi and 219Rn to the spectrum of 6.5 MeV to 7.2 MeV, and 211Po and 215Po to the spectrum of 7.2 MeV to 8.5 MeV. The sum activity of α contaminators is 0.095(4) Bq/cm3, which is smaller by a factor of 14 than that of 138La.

A similar intrinsic background exists in all of the La-containing crystals. A pioneering study [17] of the LaCl3(Ce) detector with a crystal size of ϕ25 mm ×25 mm identified the total α activity of 227Th, 221Bi, 219Rn, and 223Ra as 0.126 Bq/cm3, and each contribution is summarized in Table 3. In the present study of the B380 type, the 227Ac atom/La atom amounts to 2.0× 10-12. The sum activities of 227Th, 221Bi, 219Rn, and 223Ra are typically 40% of that in Ref. [17]. This indicates that the actinium impurity has been significantly reduced in the last decade.

138La and 227Ac impurities resulted in a counting rate (including environmental background) of 237 counts/s for γ-ray energies between 20 and 500 keV, 182 counts/s between 500 and 1.5 MeV, and 27 counts/s above 1.5 MeV in our LaBr3(Ce) detector. Self-irradiation affects its application to low-production experiments, in particular for potential cases with a count rate of less than 450 counts/s.

4 Summary

In this work, we performed a coincidence measurement using a Clover detector and identified the internal radioactive nuclei of the B380 LaBr3(Ce) detector. By combining the coincidence spectra with Geant4 simulations, we determined the activity of 138La, 211Bi, 219Rn, 223Ra, and 227Th with good accuracy. Moreover, we found that the secular equilibrium of the 227Ac decay chain is well established in the detector considered here. This allows us for the first time to decouple the activities of 207Tl, 211Po, 215Po, 223Fr, and 227Ac from the spectrum to obtain a complete picture of the intrinsic background from α- and β- decays. These data and the method presented here are useful for designing detector setups based on LaBr3(Ce), particularly for the purpose of low-count rate experiments.

References
[1] https://www.crystals.saint-gobain.com/sites/imdf.crystals.com/files/documents/lanthanum-material-data-sheet.pdf
[2] A. Iltis, M.R. Mayhugh, P. Menge, et al.,

Lanthanum halide scintillators: Properties and applications

. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 563, 359-363 (2006) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2006.02.192
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[3] J.H. Liu, D.W. Li, Z.M. Zhang et al.,

Using a LaBr3:Ce scintillator for positron annihilation lifetime spectroscopy

. Chin. Phys. C 36, 380-383 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/36/4/016
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[4] Y.Y. Ji, H.Y. Choi, W. Lee et al.

Application of a LaBr3(Ce) Scintillation Detector to an Environmental Radiation Monitor

. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 65, 2021-2028 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2018.2823322
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[5] I. Mouhti, A. Elanique, M.Y. Messous et al.,

Validation of a NaI(Tl) and LaBr3(Ce) detector’s models via measurements and Monte Carlo simulations

. Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences 11, 1687-8507 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrras.2018.06.003
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[6] C. Cheng, W.B. Jia, D.Q. Hei et al.,

Determination of thickness of wax deposition in oil pipelines using gamma-ray transmission method

. Nucl. Sci. Tech. 29, 109 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1007/s41365-018-0447-4
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[7] E.V.D van Loef, P. Dorenbos, C.W.E. van Eijk,

High-energy-resolution scintillator: Ce3+ activated LaCl3

. Appl. Phys. Lett. 77, 1467 (2000) https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1308053
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[8] K.S. Shah, J. Glodo, M. Klugerman et al.,

LaBr3:Ce scintillators for gamma-ray spectroscopy

. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 50, 2410-2413 (2003) https://doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2003.820614
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[9] R. Nicolini, F. Camera, N. Blasi, et al.,

Investigation of the properties of a LaBr3:Ce scintillator

. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 582, 554-561 (2007) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2007.08.221
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[10] F. Quarati, A.J.J. Bos, S. Brandenburg, et al.,

X-ray and gamma-ray response of a 2” × 2” LaBr3:Ce scintillation detector

. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 574, 115-120 (2007) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2007.01.161
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[11] A. Lavagno, G. Gervino, A. Scarfone,

Study of linearity and internal background for LaBr3:Ce gamma ray scintillation detector

. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 718, 504-505 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2012.11.024
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[12] M.S. Alekhin, J.T.M. de Haas, I.V. Khodyuk et al,

Improvement of gamma-ray energy resolution of LaBr3:Ce3+ scintillation detectors by Sr2+ and Ca2+ co-doping

. Appl. Phys. Lett. 102, 161915 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4803440
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[13] R. Shi, X.G. Tuo, H.L. Li, et al.,

Unfolding analysis of LaBr3:Ce gamma spectrum with a detector response matrix constructing algorithm based on energy resolution calibration

. Nucl. Sci. Tech. 29, 1 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1007/s41365-017-0340-6
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[14] https://www.crystals.saint-gobain.com/sites/imdf.crystals.com/files/documents/labr-performance summary-2019.pdf
[15] O.J. Roberts, A.M. Bruce,P.H. Regan, et al,

A LaBr3: Ce fast-timing array for DESPEC at FAIR

. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 748, 91-95 (2014) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2014.02.037
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[16] B. Longfellow, P.C. Bender, J. Belarge et al,

Commissioning of the LaBr3(Ce) detector array at the National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory

. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 916, 141-147 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2018.10.215
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[17] B.D. Milbrath, R.C. Runkle, T.W. Hossbach et al,

Characterization of alpha contamination in lanthanum trichloride scintillators using coincidence measurements

. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 547, 504-510 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2004.11.054
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[18] B.D. Milbrath, J.I. Mcintyre, R.C. Runkle, et al.,

Contamination Studies of LaBr3(Ce) Scintillators

. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 53, 3031-3034 (2006) https://doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2006.881064
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[19] R. Rosson, J. Lahr, B. Kahn,

Radation background in a LaBr3 γ-ray scintillation detector

. Health Physics. 101, 703-708 (2011) https://doi.org/10.1097/HP.0b013e3182211172
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[20] F.G.A Quarati, I.V. Khodyuk, C.W.E Eijk, et al.,

Study of 138La radioactive decays using LaBr3 scintillators

. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 53, 46-52 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2012.04.066
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[21] A. Camp, A. Vargas, J.M. Fernández-Vareab,

Determination of LaBr3(Ce) internal background using a HPGe detector and Monte Carlo simulations

. Appl Radiat Isot. 109, 512-517 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2015.11.093
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[22] https://www.nndc.bnl.gov/nudat2/chartnuc.jsp.
[23] Y.A. Trofimov, E.E. Lupar, V.N. Yurov.

Linearity of the energy scale of a detector based on a LaBr3(Ce) scintillator

. Instruments and Experimental Techniques. 56, 151-155 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1134/S0020441213010314
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[24] A. Giaz, G. Gosta, F. Camera, et al.,

Measurement of β-decay continuum spectrum of 138La

. Europhysics Letters. 110, 42002 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1209/0295-5075/110/42002
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[25] F.G.A. Quarati, P. Dorenbos, X. Mougeot,

Experiments and theory of 138La radioactive decay

. Appl Radiat Isot. 108, 30-34 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2015.11.080
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[26] F.G.A. Quarati, P. Dorenbos, X. Mougeot,

Reprint of experiments and theory of 138La radioactive decay

. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 109, 172-176 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2016.01.017
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[27] R. Sandler, G. Bollen, J. Dissanayake et al,

Direct determination of the 138La β-decay Q value using Penning trap mass spectrometry

. Phy. Rev. C 100, 014308 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.100.014308
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[28] D.H. Wright,

GEANT4-a simulation toolkit

. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 506, 250-303 (2002) https://doi.org/10.2172/799992
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[29] J. Allison, K. Amako, J. Apostolakis, et al.,

Geant4 Developments and Applications

. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 53, 270-278 (2006) https://doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2006.869826
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[30] J. Allison, K. Amako, J. Apostolakis et al,

Recent developments in Geant4

. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 835, 186-225 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2016.06.125
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[31] M. Moszynski, M. Kapusta, D. Wolski et al,

Energy Resolution of Scintillation detectors with large area avalanche photodiodes and photomultipliers light readout

. IEEE Nucl. Sci. Symp 556, 259-265 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2016.06.125
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[32] L.C. He, L.J. Diao, B.H. Sun et al,

Summing coincidence correction for γ-ray measurements using the HPGe detector with a low background shielding system

. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 880, 22-27 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2017.09.043
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
[33] https://radware.phy.ornl.gov/gf3/gf3.html#5.3.