Microscopic Description of Nuclear Structure and Fission Dynamics using Time-Dependent Density Functional Theory
Received: 2025-07-18
Revised: 2025-09-14
Accepted: 2025-11-07
Published in Issue 2026-02-28
Published Online: 2025-12-06
Copyright (c) 2025 Hossein Sadeghi (Author)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
PDF views: 240
Abstract
This investigation presents a unified theoretical framework that combines coupled-cluster nuclear structure calculations with time-dependent density functional theory (TDDFT) to describe both ground-state properties and dynamical processes in atomic nuclei. The chiral effective field theory (EFT) Hamiltonian up to N3LO provides the foundation for structure calculations, whereas the time-dependent extension of the Skyrme energy density functional treats large-amplitude collective motion. For stable nuclei up to 78Ni, coupled-cluster reproduced binding energies within 1% accuracy and predict charge radii that agree with recent precision measurements. In the actinide region, time-dependent simulations quantitatively reproduced fission fragment distributions and kinetic energy spectra, revealing a 15% reduction in descent time due to dynamical pairing correlations. For 240Pu fission, the calculations reproduced 92% of the integrated experimental fragment mass distribution. The ab initio structure calculations provide ground-state densities and pairing fields that initialize the TDDFT dynamics, ensuring consistency across energy scales. This coupling is demonstrated through the reproduction of both static properties and dynamical observables. These results establish a crucial connection between microscopic nuclear structures and macroscopic collective dynamics, while identifying specific areas that require improved treatment of three-nucleon forces and continuum couplings.
Keywords
- Time Dependent DFT,
- Nuclear Dynamics,
- Microscopic Theory,
- Fission Dynamics
References
- G. Hagen et al., Phys. Rev. C 80, 021306(R) (2009)
- X.H. Wu et al., Phys. Rev. C 105, L031303 (2022)
- E. Epelbaum et al., Eur. Phys. J. A 51, 53 (2015)
- R. Machleidt, Phys. Rev. C 63, 024001 (2001)
- T.D. Morris et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 152503 (2018)
- S. Novario et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 032501 (2023)
- C. Simenel, Eur. Phys. J. A 48, 152 (2012)
- A. Bulgac et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 122504 (2016)
- N. Schunck et al., J. Phys. G 47, 074001 (2020)
- D. Regnier et al., Comp. Phys. Comm. 225, 180 (2018)
- J. Randrup et al., Phys. Rev. C 84, 034613 (2011)
- R.F. Garcia Ruiz et al., Nature Phys. 12, 594 (2016)
- M.R. Mumpower et al., Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 86, 86 (2016)
- J.M. Lattimer, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 71, 433 (2021)
- N. Michel et al., J. Phys. G 36, 013101 (2009)
- G. Hagen et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 172501 (2016)
- Y. Tanimura et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 152501 (2017)
- M. Sadeghi et al., Phys. Rev. C 85, 034605 (2012)
- T. Ghosh et al., Eur. Phys. J. A 59, 266 (2023)
- G. F. M. Bondi et al., Comput. Phys. Commun. 269, 108129 (2021)
- E. Epelbaum et al., Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 1773 (2009)
- S. Weinberg, Phys. Lett. B 251, 288 (1990)
- R.L. Workman et al. (Particle Data Group), Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2022, 083C0
10.57647/jtap.2026.2001.01
