English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Bayesian analysis of the radiative capture reactions$^3\mathrm{He}(\alpha,\gamma)^7\mathrm{Be}$ and$^3\mathrm{H}(\alpha,\gamma)^7\mathrm{Li}$ are performed to draw inferencesabout the cross sections at threshold. We do a model comparison of twocompeting effective field theory power countings for the capture reactions. Thetwo power countings differ in the contribution of two-body electromagneticcurrents. In one power counting, two-body currents contribute at leading order,and in the other they contribute at higher orders. The former is favored for$^3\mathrm{He}(\alpha,\gamma)^7\mathrm{Be}$ if elastic scattering data in theincoming channel is considered in the analysis. Without constraints fromelastic scattering data, both the power countings are equally favored. For$^3\mathrm{H}(\alpha,\gamma)^7\mathrm{Li}$, the first power counting withtwo-body current contributions at leading order is favored with or withoutconstraints from elastic scattering data.

Bayesian analysis of capture reactions $^3\mathrm{He}(\alpha,\gamma)^7\mathrm{Be}$ and $^3\mathrm{H}(\alpha,\gamma)^7\mathrm{Li}$