SciPost Submission Page

Measurement of 3He analyzing power for p-3He scattering using the polarized 3He target

by A. Watanabe, S. Nakai, K. Sekiguchi, T. Akieda, D. Etoh, M. Inoue, Y. Inoue, K. Kawahara, H. Kon, K. Miki, T. Mukai, D. Sakai, S. Shibuya, Y. Shiokawa, T. Taguchi, H. Umetsu, Y. Utsuki, Y. Wada, M. Watanabe, M. Itoh, T. Ino, T. Wakui, K. Hatanaka, H. Kanda, H. J. Ong, D. T. Tran, S. Goto, Y. Hirai, D. Inomoto, H. Kasahara, S. Mitsumoto, H. Oshiro, T. Wakasa, Y. Maeda, K. Nonaka, H. Sakai and T. Uesaka

This is not the current version.

Submission summary

As Contributors: Atomu Watanabe
Preprint link: scipost_201911_00016v1
Date submitted: 2019-11-05
Submitted by: Watanabe, Atomu
Submitted to: SciPost Physics Proceedings
Proceedings issue: 24th European Few Body Conference (University of Surrey, U.K.)
Discipline: Physics
Subject area: Nuclear Physics - Experiment
Approach: Experimental


Proton–3He scattering is one of the good probes to study the T = 3/2 channel of three– nucleon forces. We have measured 3He analyzing powers for p−3He elastic scattering with the polarized 3He target at 70 and 100 MeV. In the conference the data were com- pared with the theoretical predictions based on the modern nucleon–nucleon potentials. Large discrepancies were found between the data and the calculations at the angles where the 3He analyzing power takes the minimum and maximum values.

Current status:
Has been resubmitted

Submission & Refereeing History

Resubmission scipost_201911_00016v2 on 16 December 2019
Submission scipost_201911_00016v1 on 5 November 2019

Reports on this Submission

Anonymous Report 1 on 2019-12-2 Invited Report


This proceedings is very nicely written. The presented work is very interesting and up to date. I wait for more results from RCNP on p-3He scattering.
From my point of view it would be very interesting to see the plot of polarization changing in the time of the experiment. I would also appreciate if the authors
estimated the (systematic) uncertainty of the measured polarization (40%+/-...) or to present the approach to establish such error. How accurate is you method ?

Requested changes

1- Introduction:
"Three–nucleon forces (3NFs) are essentially important to clarify various nuclear
properties such as few–nucleon scattering."
maybe better word will be "phenomena" instead of "properties".
2- at the end of the 3'rd section:
"A experimental setup" -> "An experimental setup"
3- Results:
"... the theoretical prediction of the CD–Bonn potential with ∆ degrees of freedom"
maybe more precise:
"... the theoretical predictions of the CD–Bonn potential with ∆-isobar degrees of freedom included".

  • validity: high
  • significance: high
  • originality: high
  • clarity: high
  • formatting: excellent
  • grammar: good

Author Atomu Watanabe on 2019-12-16
(in reply to Report 1 on 2019-12-02)

Thank you very much for your refereeing and comments.
I have done resubmission my contribution reflected your requests.

The 3He polarization was stable during the experiments.
In the experiments for about two days, the difference of the 3He polarization between the average and maximum values was about 3 % in magnitudes.
The (statistic) uncertainty of the polarization is about 3 % by the method of neutron transmission measurements.
The systematic uncertainty of this method (mainly comes from beam intensity uncertainties) is rather smaller than the statistic one.

Login to report or comment