text:
# The DIRECT Project: Influence of Blending on the Cepheid Distance Scale. II. Cepheids in M33

## 1 Introduction

As the number of extragalactic Cepheids discovered with HST continues to increase and the value of $`H_0`$ is sought from distances based on these variables (e.g. Saha et al. 1999; Freedman et al. 2001), it becomes even more important to understand various possible systematic errors which could affect the extragalactic distance scale. Currently, the most important systematic is a bias in the distance to the Large Magellanic Cloud, which provides the zero-point calibration for the Cepheid distance scale. The LMC distance is very likely significantly shorter than usually assumed (e.g. Udalski 2000; Stanek et al. 2000, Fitzpatrick et al. 2001). It still might be considered uncertain at the $`10`$% percent level (e.g. Jha et al. 1999). Another possible systematic, the metallicity dependence of the Cepheid Period-Luminosity (PL) relation, is also very much an open issue, with empirical determinations ranging from 0 to $`0.4`$ mag dex-1 (Freedman & Madore 1990; Sasselov et al. 1997; Kochanek 1997; Kennicutt et al. 1998).

In this paper we investigate the influence of blended stellar images on the derived Cepheid distances. We define blending as the close projected association of a Cepheid with one or more intrinsically luminous stars, which cannot be detected within the observed point-spread function (PSF) by photometric analysis (e.g., DAOPHOT, DoPHOT). Such blended stars are mostly other young stars which are physically associated $``$ from actual binary and multiple systems to companions which are not gravitationally bound to the Cepheid. Blending is thus a phenomenon different from crowding or confusion noise; the latter occurs in stellar fields with a crowded and complex background due to the random superposition of stars with different luminosities. In this paper, we are concerned with blending due to wide systems.

The issue of the effect of blending on the derived Cepheid distances has received some attention since the appearance of our first paper on M31 Cepheids (Mochejska et al. 2000, hereafter Paper I). An estimate of the magnitude of this effect for remote galaxies was obtained by Stanek & Udalski (1999) using the LMC stellar population as the template. Their analysis indicated that blending could be a significant (up to 20%) source of systematic error in distances determined using Cepheids. Saha, Labhardt & Prosser (2000) studied the effect of confusion noise on Cepheid derived distances using artificial star tests. Their experiment showed that this effect is within 0.1 mag for NGC 4639 at a distance of 25 Mpc. A further study of the effects of crowding and confusion noise was conducted by Ferrarese et al. (2000) as part of the HST Key Project on the Extragalactic Distance Scale, employing artificial star tests. They estimated that the photometry of Cepheids could be biased too bright by up to 0.2 mag due to crowding. Under the assumption that multiple epoch data can be used to reject most of the affected Cepheids, they derived an upper limit of 0.02 mag for the bias in the distance scale due to crowding. Gibson, Maloney & Sakai (2000) presented three empirical tests of blending. Their results were inconclusive and only indicated at a 1 $`\sigma `$ level that blending for Cepheids located in the LMC bar is not representative for the distant galaxies observed by the HST Key Project. An uncertainty of $`{}_{0}{}^{+5}\%`$ due to crowding and/or blending was included into the systematic error budget in the HST Key Project final results paper (Freedman et al. 2001). Macri et al. (2001a) studied the effect of blending in an inner field of M101 by scaling to its distance the stellar populations observed with NICMOS in M31 and M81. They concluded that this effect could be significant and lead to a 0-0.2 mag bias in the derived distance modulus.

We investigate the effects of stellar blending on the Cepheid distance scale by studying two Local Group spiral galaxies, M31 and M33. The results for M31 were presented in Paper I. In this paper, second of the series, we concentrate on M33, which for the purposes of this paper we assume to be located at a distance of 850 kpc. As part of the DIRECT project (Kaluzny et al. 1998), we have collected an extensive data set for this galaxy, and thus far have discovered $`400`$ Cepheids, among other variables. We identify some of these Cepheids on archival HST-WFPC2 images and compare them to our ground-based data to estimate the impact of blending on our photometry, taking advantage of their superior resolution – the $`0\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}12`$ FWHM on the WFPC2 camera (Ferrarese et al. 2000) corresponds to $`0.5`$ pc at the distance of M33, compared to $`6`$ pc for the ground-based data.

This paper is organized as follows: Section 2 describes the ground-based and HST data and the applied reduction procedures. In Section 3 we discuss the process of identifying Cepheids on HST WFPC2 images. In Section 4 we present the Cepheid blending catalog and discuss it in Section 5. In Section 6 we present the results of artificial star tests. In Section 7 we show an example of an extremely blended Cepheid. The implications of our results for remote galaxies are studied in Section 8. In Section 9 we discuss the results of other investigations of Cepheid blending and/or crowding. The concluding remarks are to be found in Section 10.

## 2 Observations and Data Reduction

### 2.1 Ground-based Data

The ground-based data were obtained as part of the DIRECT project between September 1996 and October 1997 during 42 nights on the F. L. Whipple Observatory 1.2 m telescope and 10 nights on the Michigan-Dartmouth-MIT 1.3 m telescope. Three $`11^{}\times 11^{}`$ fields A, B and C with a scale of 0.32 ″/pixel were monitored, located north, south and southwest of the center of M33, respectively. The data for fields A and B has been reduced and the $`BVI`$ photometry of 251 Cepheid variables published by Macri et al. (2001b). The reduction of the field C data, which is now part of a larger field Y, is in progress and the results will be reported by Stanek et al. (2001). The applied reduction, calibration and variable selection procedures were described by Kaluzny et al. (1998).

### 2.2 HST data

The archival HST-WFPC2 data used in this paper were retrieved from the Hubble Data Archive. We selected images overlapping our M33 fields observed from the ground, taken in filters F439W, F450W (roughly $`B`$), F555W, F606W ($`V`$) and F814W ($`I`$). The pixel scales of the Wide Field (WF) and Planetary Camera (PC) chips are 0.1 and 0.046 ″/pixel, respectively.

The HST data overlapping our fields A and B had already passed through the standard preliminary processing and calibration procedures prior to its placement in the Archive. The HST data for field C, retrieved later, was calibrated by the On-The-Fly Calibration (OTFC) system at the time when our request was processed. The standard pipeline calibration and the OTFC are fully described in the HST Data Handbook.

The images were corrected under IRAF111IRAF is distributed by the National Optical Astronomy Observatories, which are operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under cooperative agreement with the NSF. for the geometric distortion in the WFPC2 optics and for bad pixels (Stetson 1998). Whenever possible, the images were combined to remove cosmic rays. The photometry was extracted using the DAOPHOT/ALLSTAR package (Stetson 1987, 1992). A more detailed description of the reduction procedure can be found in Paper I.

It should be noted that the HST photometry has not been calibrated to any standard system and therefore instrumental magnitudes are used throughout this paper. This has, however, no bearing on the results presented in this paper, since they are strictly based on differential photometry.

## 3 The Identification of DIRECT Cepheids in HST Data

The preliminary identification of DIRECT Cepheids on the HST frames was performed under SAOimage ds9222SAOimage ds9 was developed under a grant from NASA’s Applied Information System Research Program (NAG5-3996), with support from the Chandra Science Center (NAS8-39073) by a visual comparison of the HST data matched via World Coordinate System (WCS) information to our ground-based $`V`$-band templates. The WCS information for the ground-based template image header was derived by matching stars from the image to the USNO A2.0 Catalog stars (Monet et al. 1996) using the WCSTools image astrometry toolkit (Mink 1999).

Our list of Cepheids consists of an early version of the Macri et al. (2001b) catalog supplemented by field C Cepheids with periods in excess of 10 days. We have matched a total of 102 Cepheids to HST data: 48 in field A, 39 in field B and 15 in field C. There are 64 Cepheids with periods over 10 days in this sample.

In some cases a Cepheid which appeared to be a single star on the $`V`$-band template was resolved into multiple stars on an HST image. Two examples are shown in Figure 1. The images plotted in the left panels are from the $`V`$-band template image (FWHM $`1\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}4`$) and those in the right panel were taken with the WF chips of the WFPC2 camera. Circles $`0\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}75`$ in radius are drawn centered on the Cepheids. The Cepheid D33J013329.5+303556.9 is shown in the upper panels. On the ground-based template it appears as a single star, while on the HST image it is resolved into two objects differing by 2.5 magnitudes in brightness. The lower panels show the case of D33J013330.2+303803.7, where the Cepheid, single on the ground $`V`$-band template, is resolved by HST into three stars, with the two companions fainter by 2 and 3 magnitudes.

To help confirm the Cepheid nature of the objects selected, instrumental color-magnitude diagrams (CMDs) were constructed from HST data, whenever photometry in two bands was available. A few representative ($`v_{F555W},v_{F555W}i_{F814W}`$) CMDs are shown in Figure 2. The Cepheids are denoted by circles and their companions by squares. Stars from the same image are plotted in the background for reference. The upper panels present two Cepheids with blue blends (those shown in Fig. 1). D33J013329.5+303556.9, in the upper left panel, has a blue companion contributing 10% of its flux in $`V`$ and 6% in $`I`$. D33J013330.2+303803.7, in the upper right panel, has two blue blends at the level of 14% and 6% in $`V`$ and 8% and 5% in $`I`$. In the lower left panel we show the Cepheid D33J013353.5+304744.1 with one blue and two red companions at the level of 33%, 24%, 20% in $`V`$ and 18%, 64%, 29% in $`I`$. D33J013407.9+303831.6 in the lower right panel is a case with three red blends at the level of 34%, 19%, 8% in $`V`$ and 55%, 10%, 27% in $`I`$.

### 3.1  The extremely blended Cepheid D33J013341.3+303212.7

In our ground-based M33 data we have discovered a highly blended Cepheid, exhibiting a very low amplitude of variability and the color of an upper main sequence star (D33J013341.3+303212.7, $`P=20.15^d`$). We present this Cepheid as more of a curiosity or an instructive example than a problem in the determination of distances. Such Cepheids can be very easily rejected on the basis of their low amplitudes and often discrepant colors.

Without the a priori knowledge of the degree of contamination by blending, we have estimated the brightness of the companion in $`V`$ and $`I`$ by adding constant flux to the $`VI`$ light curves of a Cepheid with a very similar period ($`P=20.51^d`$, $`V=19.96`$, $`VI=1.10`$), to achieve the best match with the light curve of the highly blended Cepheid (Fig. 3). From the above analysis we have obtained a $`V`$ magnitude of 18.35 mag and $`VI`$ color of -0.15 mag for the blend.

An investigation of this variable in the HST data yielded the values of $`S_V=3.10`$ and $`S_B=6.60`$. Taking into account the phase at which the Cepheid was at the time of the HST observation, the blending companion is brighter by 1.53 mag than the Cepheid in the $`V`$-band. In $`B`$ this difference amounts to about 2 mag. The 1.53 mag difference in $`V`$ agrees very well with the 1.61 mag derived from light curve analysis.

## 4 The M33 Blending Catalog

We have adopted three criteria that a companion to a Cepheid has to fulfill to be included into our catalog as a blend. The star has to:

1. be located at a distance less than $`0\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}75`$ from the Cepheid,
2. be undetected by DAOPHOT in our ground-based images,
3. contribute at least 6% of the flux of the Cepheid in the same filter.

The choice of maximum distance was motivated by the typical full width at half maximum (FWHM) in our ground-based images ($`1\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}5`$). We have increased the minimum flux of the blend from 4% of the flux of the Cepheid, as adopted in our study of blending in M31 (Paper I) to 6%, to obtain a little more conservative estimate.

We have examined the Cepheids on the HST images to check for false detections (cosmic rays in case of single images, bad columns, etc.) or companions missing from the DAOPHOT list. In the former case the object was removed from the photometry list, in the latter its coordinates were entered by hand and DAOPHOT was run again on the corrected list.

To quantify blending we have used the parameter $`S_F`$, defined in Paper I as the sum of all flux contributions in filter $`F`$ normalized to the flux of the Cepheid:

$$S_F=\underset{i=1}{\overset{N_F}{}}\frac{f_i}{f_C}$$
(1)
where $`f_i`$ is the flux of the i-th companion, $`f_C`$ the flux of the Cepheid on the HST image and $`N_F`$ the total number of companions.

We have also determined the surface brightness around the Cepheids on the ground-based $`V`$-band images taken on the same night as the photometric standards. The surface brightness was computed as the mode within a 20 pixel radius. We used a bin width of 1 ADU for the histogram to compute the value of the mode, smoothed with a flat-topped rectangular kernel (boxcar) filter 11 units in length. After correcting for the sky level, the instrumental surface brightness values were converted to mag/□″using 7-8 fairly bright isolated reference stars with known standard magnitudes. The $`rms`$ scatter around the value of the average ranged from 0.042 to 0.071 mag/□″.

In Table 1 we present the blending catalog for 102 Cepheids found on the HST images: the name, the period, the mean $`V`$, $`I`$ and $`B`$ magnitudes taken from Macri et al. (2001b) and Stanek et al. (2001), the number of companions $`N_F`$ and their total flux contribution $`S_F`$ in the $`V`$, $`I`$ and $`B`$ bands respectively. The $`V`$, as in $`N_V`$ and $`S_V`$, refers to filters F555W and F606W, $`I`$ to F814W and $`B`$ to F439W and F450W. For Cepheids identified on more than one HST image, the average values of $`S_F`$ are listed. The last column gives the $`V`$ band surface brightness $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_V`$ within a 20 pixel (6$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$4) radius.

## 5 Discussion of the Properties of Blending

### 5.1 The Magnitude of the Effect of Blending

In Table 2 we present blending statistics for the M33 Cepheids. We list the average and median blending in $`BVI`$ filters for the entire sample and for two subsamples, consisting of the Cepheids with periods below and above 10 days, respectively. The sizes of the samples ($`N`$) are also given. For all three samples blending is most significant in the $`I`$-band (21% all P, 29% $`P<10^d`$, 14% $`P>10^d`$), intermediate in $`B`$ (15%, 26%, 10%) and least in $`V`$ (14%, 25%, 7%). Blending is more substantial for the short period Cepheids.

Figure 4 shows the cumulative probability distributions of $`S_V`$, $`S_I`$ and $`S_B`$ for the M33 Cepheids, using solid, dotted and dashed lines, respectively. The panels, going from left to right, show these distributions for the entire sample and for Cepheids with periods below and above 10 days, respectively. The plots are restricted to Cepheids with blending $`S_F`$ up to 0.5, to show in more detail the most interesting range, where cases with blending cannot be easily distinguished and rejected. About 80-90% of all Cepheids are contained within this range.

As expected from the Period-Luminosity relation, the short period (hence fainter) Cepheids suffer more from blending than do the long period (hence brighter) ones. Upon examining Fig. 4, we again note that the contribution from blends tends to be strongest in the $`I`$-band, intermediate in $`B`$ and weakest in $`V`$. This trend is best seen in the long period sample. A likely explanation can be found by examining the CMDs in Fig. 2. Our limit of $`S_F=6\%`$ corresponds to a difference of 3.05 magnitudes in brightness between the Cepheid and its companion. The stars which could contribute enough flux to become blends will thus most likely be located on the upper main sequence (MS) or on the red giant branch (RGB). In effect there should be more companions which are brightest in the $`B`$-band (upper MS) or in $`I`$ (RGB) and relatively few in $`V`$.

In case of the short period Cepheids, below $`S_F=0.25`$ ($`50\%`$ of the sample) blending is equal across all bands. Two factors could account for this behavior: poorer statistics due to the smaller size of the sample, especially in $`B`$ and $`I`$, and the increased contribution of faint intermediate color blends. Above $`S_F=0.25`$, $`V`$-band seems to be least affected by blending.

Another feature seen in this Figure is the relatively large number of unblended Cepheids in the $`B`$ band, compared to $`I`$ and, especially, $`V`$. This might be due to the fact that on average the HST exposure times in $`V`$ and $`I`$ were 2 $``$ 3 times longer than in $`B`$. The fainter blends in $`B`$ could thus elude detection, especially in case of the short period Cepheids.

In Figure 5 we show the blending parameters $`S_V`$, $`S_I`$ and $`S_B`$ as functions of the respective ground-based standard mean magnitudes. Short period Cepheids are indicated with circles and long period ones with triangles. No clear correlation of blending with the magnitude of the Cepheid is seen, although the short period Cepheids appear on average to be more blended, in accordance with Fig. 4. There is a substantial overlap in brightness for the short and long period samples.

### 5.2  The Colors of the Blends

In Figure 6 we present the relative color distributions of the blends in $`S_IS_V`$ (top) and $`S_VS_B`$ (bottom). The panels, going from left to right, show these distributions for the entire sample and for Cepheids with periods below and above 10 days, respectively. Only Cepheids with non-zero blending in at least one of the bands are plotted. Table 3 lists the median colors and the number of cases of red and blue blending for each of the three period ranges.

The color distributions of the blends for the entire Cepheid sample exhibit maxima approximately at 0. The maxima show double peaks due to the fact that most blends are either redder or bluer than the Cepheids. In the $`S_VS_B`$ distribution there are almost as many red blends as there are blue, while in $`S_IS_V`$ there is a noticeable excess of red blends.

After decomposing the sample into long and short period Cepheids it becomes apparent that the sample of short period Cepheid blends is markedly the redder of the two. This is at least in part due to the correlation between Cepheid luminosity and color – fainter Cepheids are bluer than brighter ones. For the long period Cepheids blue blends dominate in $`S_VS_B`$, where there are twice as many blue blends as red. The $`S_IS_V`$ color distribution is almost uniform. The peak is shifted slightly to the blue, but a red tail is present. The double structure of the maxima is more prominent than in the entire sample, especially in $`S_VS_B`$.

### 5.3  The Environments of the Cepheids

There have been suggestions in the literature (e.g. Ferrarese et al. 2000) that blending should increase with the measured values of surface brightness. We investigate empirically this effect using our M33 data. The left panel of Figure 7 shows blending $`S_V`$ as a function of the $`V`$-band surface brightness within a radius of $`6\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}4`$ around the M33 Cepheids on the ground-based images. Field A Cepheids are denoted by squares, field B by circles and field C by triangles. We find no such correlation between blending and the underlying surface brightness – Cepheids in environments of different surface brightness show roughly the same frequency and amount of blending.

To put these values into perspective, we have computed the surface brightness for two galaxies which straddle their range, NGC 4535 and NGC 2541. The HST data for these galaxies, observed as part of the HST Key Project on the Extragalactic Distance Scale (Macri et al. 1999, Ferrarese et al. 1998), were obtained from the Hubble Data Archive. The implemented procedure was described in Paper I. In the right panel of Figure 7 we plot the surface brightness distributions for Cepheids in M33, M31 (Paper I), NGC 4535 and NGC 2541. As seen in the diagram, M33 spans a wide range in surface brightness – three magnitudes, from 19.7 to 22.8 mag/□″. The distribution shows two clear maxima: the brighter one corresponds to Cepheids located within the spiral arms and the fainter one to those in regions in between the arms. There is also a tail of Cepheids from very bright regions, in the proximity of the M33 nucleus. M31 overlaps mostly with the brighter maximum of M33. The NGC 4535 distribution peaks slightly above the fainter maximum of M33. NGC 2541 also overlaps the fainter maximum in M33, though about half of its Cepheids are located in regions of lower surface brightness, where our M33 coverage is much more sparse (4 Cepheids). We conclude that our Cepheids in M33 reside in environments of surface brightness typical of spiral galaxies.

## 6  Crowding vs. Blending - Artificial Star Tests

In our previous paper on blending of Cepheids in M31 (Paper I) we have made a distinction between the phenomena of crowding and blending. We defined blending as the close projected association of a Cepheid with one or more intrinsically luminous stars, mostly other young stars which are physically associated - from actual binary and multiple systems to companions which are not gravitationally bound to the Cepheid. In the case of our investigation we are limited by resolution to wide systems. Crowding or confusion noise occurs in stellar fields with a crowded and complex background due to the random superposition of stars of different luminosity.

In such dense fields as are observed in galaxies, the blending estimate for a Cepheid will also include crowding. Based on our M33 data we will try to address the issue of the importance of blending relative to crowding. If we assume that a Cepheid is associated with other luminous stars located in its proximity, then moving it to a randomly chosen position on the image will break that association. In the former case, the Cepheid will be subject to blending; in the latter, to crowding.

To estimate the influence of crowding we have generated a catalog of randomly distributed stars with the same magnitudes as the actual Cepheids, following the same technique as for the Cepheid blending catalog. For each Cepheid observed on a WFPC2 image we generated a list of 100 random positions and determined the contribution from companions at that location. We also determined the surface brightness values on the ground-based images around these positions. Our artificial star catalog, thereafter referred to as the artificial catalog, contains data for $`9200`$ realizations in $`V`$, $`5300`$ in $`I`$ and $`3000`$ in $`B`$.

The construction of the blending catalog described in Section 4 (thereafter referred to as corrected) involved the visual examination of all putative companions, to correct for missing and/or false detections. The large number of realizations in the artificial crowding catalog precluded us from making a similar inspection. Therefore, the original unaltered catalog of Cepheid blends (thereafter uncorrected) seems to be the more natural choice for a comparison between blending and crowding. In the discussion that follows, we have used the uncorrected blend catalog; K-S tests show that at confidence levels of 93%-100% the distributions for the corrected and uncorrected catalogs are consistent with a single distribution (Tab. 4).

### 6.1 The Magnitude of the Effects of Blending and Crowding

We have divided the sample of M33 Cepheids into two bins in period at $`P=10^d`$ and three bins in surface brightness, separated at $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_V=21.6`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_V=20.8`$ mag/□″. The division into different surface brightness regions was motivated by the clear separation of Cepheids located inside and outside the spiral arms and the existence of a high surface brightness tail associated with the nucleus, as seen in the right panel of Fig. 7. The magnitude of the effect of crowding will be different in each of the three ranges of surface brightness, therefore we have decided to analyze them separately.

Figure 8 shows the cumulative probability distributions for $`S_V`$ drawn from the artificial crowding catalog (dashed line) and the uncorrected Cepheid blending catalog (solid line). We show the distributions for Cepheids with $`P>10^d`$ in the upper panels and with $`P<10^d`$ in the lower ones. Note that the scales on the $`S_V`$ axes are different for the two period ranges. The left, middle and right panels show the lowest, medium and highest surface brightness regions, respectively. The lower right panel is not drawn, as there was only one short period Cepheid in the highest surface brightness range.

Let us first consider the Cepheids located in regions of lowest surface brightness (leftmost panels of Fig. 8). A visual inspection reveals that blending is stronger than crowding for these Cepheids. The K-S test confirms the impression that these data sets are different, giving a 1% and 3% probability that they are drawn from the same distribution, for the short and long period Cepheids, respectively. The difference between the magnitude of those two effects for the long period Cepheids is not as large as for the short period ones. This is expected, as a short period (fainter) Cepheid will yield a higher value of $`S_V`$ than a long period (brighter) Cepheid when blended with a star of the same magnitude.

We now move on to Cepheids located in intermediate surface brightness regions (middle panels of Fig. 8). At first glance, it appears that the magnitude of the effects of blending and crowding is comparable. For the short period Cepheids the K-S test shows that these data sets are consistent with a single distribution at a confidence level of 93%. In case of the long period sample, the K-S test gives a probability of only 10%. Nevertheless, even if the distributions differ, the two effects are still similar in magnitude.

Finally, we examine the case of Cepheids located in the highest surface brightness regions (upper right panel of Fig. 8). We note that blending is weaker than crowding for these Cepheids. This effect is most likely due to selection effects. In regions of such high surface brightness we are biased towards finding luminous Cepheids with weaker than average blending. The K-S test results are not conclusive in determining whether or not these two data sets are drawn from different distributions. Also, crowding for these Cepheids is weaker than for those in the intermediate surface brightness regions, as luminous Cepheids are less succeptible to crowding.

The above analysis indicates that the importance of blending relative to crowding very likely increases with decreasing surface brightness. This is not unexpected, as young stars are known to cluster (Harris & Zaritsky 1999). Increasing the level of crowding will tend to obscure this effect.

### 6.2  The Colors of Blending and Crowding Companions

Figure 9 presents the relative color distributions of the blending and crowding companions in $`S_IS_V`$ (top) and $`S_VS_B`$ (bottom), drawn from the artificial star crowding catalog (hatched histogram) and the corrected Cepheid blending catalog (filled histogram). We only plot the distribution from the corrected catalog, since it is closer to the true color distribution than the one drawn from the uncorrected catalog. The panels, going from left to right, show the distribution for Cepheids with periods below and above 10 days, respectively. Only Cepheids with non-zero blending in at least one of the bands are plotted. The distributions are normalized to unity. The number of Cepheids from the corrected and uncorrected catalogs may be different, as some Cepheids will pass the 6% threshold in one catalog and not in the other.

Let us first examine the colors of the crowding companions. The $`S_IS_V`$ color distributions are shifted towards the red, though the one for long period Cepheids is asymmetric, with a small bump on the blue side. In $`S_VS_B`$ the distributions show two peaks. For short period Cepheids the red peak is more pronounced, while for long period Cepheids they are comparable and there is a tail extending bluewards. This is consistent with the interpretation presented in §5.1. The stars which could contribute enough flux to cross the 6% threshold will most likely be blue stars on the upper MS or red stars on the RGB.

As far as can be inferred from the modest sample of short period Cepheids, the blends to the Cepheids show qualitatively similar color distributions as the companions due to crowding. The color distributions of long period Cepheid blends show subtle differences from the crowding color distributions. The $`S_IS_V`$ color distribution of blends with long period Cepheids peaks to the blue of the distribution of crowding companions, while in $`S_VS_B`$ the blue peak is more distinct than the red one, while for the artificial stars the two peaks were of comparable magnitude.

The above comparison indicates that the distribution of the colors of blends to the short period Cepheids and of crowding stars are most likely similar, while the blends to the long period Cepheids tend to be bluer than the crowding stars. If so, this would lend support to the notion that more luminous (hence younger) Cepheids should be located close to their place of formation, near other young blue stars.

## 7  Indications for Remote Galaxies

As the number of extragalactic Cepheids discovered with HST continues to increase, it becomes crucial to obtain constrains on the bias in their photometry introduced by the effect of blending. Using the HST M33 data as the template we will try to obtain an estimate of the effect that blending would have on this galaxy if it were observed at their distances. The actual magnitude of the effect of blending will depend on many factors, such as the morphology of the host galaxy, the surface brightness of the regions in which the Cepheids are located, the brightness distribution of the Cepheids, the actual sample of Cepheids, the methods of variable extraction and classification, etc. Nonetheless, M33 can yield a useful order of magnitude constraint, as it is a spiral galaxy of surface brightness typical for those where Cepheids are sought and is observed at a moderate inclination ($`56^{}`$, Schmidt, Priebe & Boller 1993).

The average FWHM on the DIRECT project ground-based images of M33 is about $`1\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}5`$, or $`6`$ pc. A similar spatial resolution would be achieved with the WF chips of the HST-WFPC2 camera for a galaxy at a distance of $`11`$ Mpc. By increasing the radius around the Cepheid for summing the contributions of the blends we can simulate the deterioration of resolution due to the increasing distance to the galaxy. For our purpose we have chosen the radii of $`0\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}7`$, $`1\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}1`$, $`1\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}4`$, $`1\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}8`$, $`2\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}1`$, corresponding to the $`0\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}12`$ FWHM on the WF chips at distances of 10, 15, 20, 25 and 30 Mpc, assuming a distance of 850 kpc to M33. We have restricted ourselves to the long period ($`P>10^d`$) sample, as long period Cepheids are preferred for determining distances.

The left panel of Figure 10 shows the cumulative probability distribution of $`S_V`$ for different cutoff radii (proxy for distance). As expected, blending increases with distance and becomes severe at radii corresponding to M33 seen at distances of 20, 25 and 30 Mpc, where the median 0 of $`S_V`$ are 37%, 68% and 89%. The highly blended Cepheids will of course be recognized as such based on the diminished amplitude of variability and, possibly, different colors.

In a study of crowding Ferrarese et al. (2000) find that it is virtually impossible to recognize a Cepheid with $`S_V30\%`$ as affected from the change in the amplitude of the light curve, and it only becomes possible for most Cepheids when $`S_V`$ exceeds 60%. To make our estimate of blending more realistic we have redrawn these distributions in the right panel of Fig. 10 making the assumption that all Cepheids with $`S_V>45\%`$ will be recognized as blended and rejected from the sample. Here blending also increases with distance for the most part, though the distributions are seen to cross each other on several occasions. Most striking is the case of the 25 Mpc and 30 Mpc distributions, where strong blending ($`S_V>20\%`$) is more severe at 25 Mpc than at 30 Mpc. This is due to the fact that as the overall value of blending increases, the slope of the $`S_V`$ distribution flattens out and does not change considerably in the relevant range of $`S_V`$.

The bias in distance due to blending is illustrated in Fig. 11 as a function of distance. At distances of 10-20 Mpc the bias increases from $`0\%3\%`$ to $`8\%`$, depending on the statistic used and levels off at $`9\%10\%`$ at 25-30 Mpc. The bias introduced by blending into the distance modulus expressed in magnitudes is to a very good approximation equal to $`S_V`$ for $`S_V0.2`$.

## 8 Other investigations of blending

Since the appearance of our first paper based on M31 Cepheids (Paper I) the effect of blending on the Cepheid distance scale has been subject to further study. In this section we will present a short discussion of the results obtained by other groups and try to relate our results to theirs. In several papers our results and those of Stanek & Udalski (1999) discussed below, have been questioned; we will also address this issue.

Stanek & Udalski (1999) estimated the effect of blending for remote galaxies using the OGLE LMC Cepheid and star catalogs (Udalski et al. 1999, 2000) as the unblended template. Their approach involved summing the contribution of blends within a range of radii around the Cepheids, corresponding to the resolution of the WF camera at different distances. The distance moduli were derived from fitting the P-L relations to all Cepheids whose $`I`$-band amplitudes exceeded 0.4 mag after accounting for blending. Their results indicated that blending could introduce a substantial bias into Cepheid derived distances: $`<`$0.1 mag at distances $`<`$15 Mpc and 0.2-0.3 mag for more remote galaxies.

An analysis of the effect of confusion noise on Cepheid distances based on artificial star tests was presented by Saha, Labhardt & Prosser (2000). That work dealt with the contribution from the underlying confusion pattern resulting from the unresolved stellar background. Their simulations showed that this effect is within 0.1 mag for NGC 4639 at a distance of 25 Mpc. Our estimates include both confusion noise and stars that would be resolved if they were observed at a larger separation from the Cepheid. Therefore it is not surprising that the Saha et al. result is somewhat lower than our estimate of a 0.2 mag bias at a distance of 25 Mpc.

A further study of the effects of crowding and confusion noise, addressing specifically the case of the HST Key Project, was performed by Ferrarese et al. (2000) using artificial star tests. They estimated that the effect of crowding could bias the photometry of the Cepheids to be too bright by 0.05 mag for NGC 2541 at 11 Mpc and 0.2 mag for NGC 1365 at 18 Mpc.

The Ferrarese et al. simulations account only for the effect of crowding, and not for blending, which appears to be more significant than crowding in low surface brightness regions (Fig. 8). This dependence will most likely result from the clustering of Cepheids with other young stars and will become more prominent at lower levels of crowding. Such clustering has been observed for blue MS stars in the LMC (Harris & Zaritsky 1999).

Ferrarese et al. assume that most of the affected Cepheids can be rejected using multiple epoch data on the basis of several criteria, thus diminishing the bias in distance to less than 0.02 mag. One of these criteria is based on the assumption that affected stars should have larger photometric errors. We have investigated the existence of a correlation between Cepheid blending and the reported DAOPHOT/ALLSTAR photometric errors. In Figure 12 we plot the photometric errors of stars in M33 fields A and B as a function of magnitude, from Macri et al. (2001c). Cepheids are indicated by solid dots surrounded by circles of size proportional to their value of $`S_V`$. The white-filled symbols indicate Cepheids with $`S_V<0.5`$. This figure clearly illustrates that there is no correlation between photometric errors and $`S_V`$ – any kind of cut based on photometric errors will not discriminate between affected and unaffected Cepheids.

Another selection criterion examined by Ferrarese et al. (2000) is that a Cepheid to be used in the distance determination should fall within the magnitude range applicable to its period range. In practice this amounts to the rejection of outliers deviating from the mean by more than 3 times the $`\sigma `$ of the best fit (Ferrarese et al. 1998). In case of NGC 2541 at 12 Mpc the 3 $`\sigma `$ deviation corresponds to $`\pm 0.81`$ mag in $`V`$ and $`\pm 0.54`$ mag in $`I`$. Even seriously affected Cepheids can pass this criterion. Ferrarese et al. (2000) confirm that it is virtually impossible to discriminate against Cepheids for which the contamination amounts to 30% or less of the Cepheid mean flux. These are the most common types of blends, and thus of greatest concern (only 15% of our $`P>10^d`$ Cepheids have $`S_V>30\%`$). Furthermore, they find that only when the contamination is increased above 60% are they able to recognize most Cepheids as affected.

We do not observe the correlation between blending and surface brightness, predicted by Ferrarese et al. (Fig. 6 in Paper I; Fig. 7). Contrary to their unsupported claim the M31 Cepheids used in our analysis are not located in regions where the stellar background is significantly brighter than for the HST KP galaxies (Fig. 7 in Paper I; Fig. 7). Lastly, based on the residuals from the $`H`$-band Tully-Fisher relation Ferrarese et al. concluded that the blending hypothesis could be ruled out at the 1.85 $`\sigma `$ level. As Gibson et al. (2000) pointed out, this result is erroneous, as they had neglected the uncertainties associated with each of the residuals.

Three empirical tests of blending were presented by Gibson, Maloney & Sakai (2000). The predicted influence of blending on Cepheid derived distances was quantified by fitting a functional form to the results for LMC Cepheids presented by Stanek & Udalski (1999), which, as indicated therein, seems to have on average higher surface brightness than a typical HST Key Project galaxy. The authors find that the observed distribution of peak luminosities for five type Ia SNe excludes the blending hypothesis defined as above at a $``$1 $`\sigma `$ level. The second test, $`I`$ and $`H`$-band Tully-Fisher residuals, is not able to discriminate between the no blending and strong blending hypothesis: both models differ from the best fit lines, at most, at the 1 $`\sigma `$ level. The third test involves the comparison of distance moduli derived separately from the PC chip and the WF chips. As the PC chip has twice the resolution of the WF chips, there should be a systematic difference between these distance moduli. For five galaxies at a distance of $`31`$ mag, the observed differences have an rms scatter of 0.08 mag around the mean value of 0.03 mag, while the predicted offset is 0.11 mag. We would advise caution when drawing conclusions from this comparison. There are many other factors that the authors have neglected which will invalidate the results of such a comparison, like poor statistics on the PC chips (9, 6, 6, 6 and 4 Cepheids for the five galaxies), different orientations of the camera with respect to the galaxy, selection effects (see upper right panel of Fig. 8), finite intrinsic width of the P-L relation. Gibson et al. results are inconclusive and only indicate at a 1 $`\sigma `$ level that blending for Cepheids located in the LMC bar is not representative for the distant galaxies observed by the HST Key Project.

The final HST Key Project paper (Freedman et al. 2001) includes into the systematic error budget an uncertainty of $`{}_{0}{}^{+5}\%`$ due to crowding and blending. The authors conclude that to assess quantatively the impact of unresolved blending effects would require simulations based on the distribution of Cepheids in a galaxy field unaffected by blending, such as the study applied to the M101 Cepheids observed with NICMOS (Macri et al. 2001a).

The choice of M101 as the target to study the effects of blending was motivated by the large differences in the $`H`$ and $`J`$-band Cepheid-based distance moduli in the inner and outer M101 fields: $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mu _H=0.46\pm 0.12`$ mag and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mu _J=0.37\pm 0.12`$ mag. The approach adopted by Macri et al. (2001a) involved scaling the stellar separations in the well resolved fields in M31 and M81 to the distance of M101 and their magnitudes to the exposure time of the M101 images. Artificial fields were generated from these star lists and Cepheid photometry extracted following the same procedure as for the actual data. The resulting distance moduli obtained from the Cepheid PL fits were found to be smaller than the input ones by 0-0.2 mag, depending on the applied period cutoff. Based on these results the authors conclude that a substantial fraction of the difference in the distance moduli could be due to blending. In addition, the fact that the inner M101 field Cepheids exhibit the same correlation between $`E(VI)`$ and $`E(VH)`$ as those in other galaxies suggests that on average, the contamination due to blending has not introduced a significant change in the color of the Cepheids.

The issue of blending has also been studied for stars in general, to estimate its influence on the shape of the derived luminosity functions. At high enough levels of stellar density an individual resolution element may contain random clumps of several stars, and a photometric reduction package will not be able to recognize the multiple nature of the object. Renzini (1998) explored this issue on theoretical grounds and found that the number of blends is proportional to the square of both the surface brightness and the actual resolution. He concluded that meaningful photometry can be obtained for stars much brighter than the total luminosity observed in one resolution element. This effect was also investigated empirically by DePoy et al. (1993), who compared the luminosity functions derived from images binned by varying factors and by Stephens et al. (2001), using simulations of entire star clusters, as observed in M31 with NICMOS. Both groups find that due to extreme crowding, the measured luminosity function may appear to extend to brighter magnitudes than the true luminosity function. They also point out that typical artificial star experiments will not reproduce the effect of crowding discussed above.

## 9 Conclusions

We have determined the effect of blending in $`BVI`$ for a sample of 102 Cepheids in the M33 galaxy by comparing our ground-based images collected with a 1.2 m telescope to archival HST data. We found the average (median) flux contribution from luminous companions not resolved on the ground-based images in the $`V`$, $`I`$, $`B`$ bands ($`S_V`$, $`S_I`$, $`S_B`$) to be about 24% (14%), 30% (21%), 29% (15%) of the flux of the Cepheid. For 64 Cepheids with periods in excess of 10 days the average (median) values of $`S_V`$, $`S_I`$, $`S_B`$ are 16% (7%), 23% (14%), 20% (10%). Blending is least significant in $`V`$, intermediate in $`B`$ and strongest in $`I`$. These results show that depending on the sample of Cepheids chosen, our ground-based $`V`$-band photometry for the M33 Cepheids could be systematically underestimated by 8%-11% (3%-6%).

We have studied crowding and blending as separate phenomena using artificial star tests. Our results indicate that the effect of blending could be more significant than crowding in regions of lower surface brightness, below 21.6 mag/□″. The two effects are comparable in magnitude in intermediate surface brightness regions ($`20.8\mathrm{\Sigma }_V21.6`$ mag/□″).

We have also investigated the colors of the blends and of the crowding companions. The blends to short period Cepheids ($`P<10^d`$) are on average redder than the blends to long period Cepheids ($`P>10^d`$), in accordance with the Cepheid period$``$luminosity$``$color relation. In most cases, blending does not significantly influence the color of the Cepheid. As in the case of the blends, the crowding companions to short period Cepheids are on average redder than the companions to long period Cepheids. We compare the blending and crowding color distributions and find indications that for long period Cepheids the blends could on average be bluer than the companions introduced by crowding.

We have estimated the effect of blending at resolutions corresponding to a range of distances from 10 to 30 Mpc, using the HST M33 data as an unblended template stellar population. Assuming that all Cepheids with $`S_V>45\%`$ will be recognized as blended and rejected from the sample, we find that the distance underestimate increases from $`0\%3\%`$ to 8% at 10-15 Mpc and levels off at 9%-10% at 25-30 Mpc. This indicates that blending could potentially be a substantial source of error in the Cepheid distance scale.

As the result of blending with other unresolved stars, the Cepheids appear brighter than they really are when observed in distant galaxies with HST. As we compare them with mostly unblended LMC Cepheids, this leads to systematically low distances to galaxies observed with HST, and therefore to systematically high estimates of $`H_0`$. The sign of the effect of blending on $`H_0`$ is opposite to that caused by the lower LMC distance (e.g. Udalski 2000; Stanek et al. 2000) and might be of comparable value, as discussed in this paper. It should be stressed that blending is a factor which contributes in only one direction, and therefore it will not average out when a large sample of galaxies is considered.

A potential solution to the problem of blending could be the Cepheid period - flux amplitude relation. Unfortunately this relation is not universal, as Paczyński & Pindor (2000) find that SMC Cepheids have lower amplitudes than those in the LMC and in our Galaxy. They suggest metallicity as the most natural reason for this difference. If this is the case and the metallicity dependence could be calibrated, the Cepheid period - flux amplitude relation could offer the possibility to obtain Cepheid distance determinations not affected by blending.

Janusz Kaluzny and Bohdan Paczyński have provided us with helpful comments on the manuscript. We would like to thank Janusz Kaluzny for providing us with his database management codes, Peter Stetson for the HST WFPC2 point-spread functions and Doug Mink for assistance in automating image astrometry. This work was partially based on observations with the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope, obtained from the data Archive at the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc. under NASA contract No. NAS5-26555. Support for this work was provided by NASA through Grant AR-08741 from the Space Telescope Science Institute. BJM was supported by the Foundation for Polish Science stipend for young scientists and the Polish KBN grants 2P03D003.17 to Janusz Kaluzny and 2P03D025.19. DDS acknowledges support from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. Partial support for KZS was provided by NASA through Hubble Fellowship Grant HF-01124.01-A from the Space Telescope Science Institute.


format: text

text:
# Structure of unstable light nuclei

## 1 Introduction

The light nuclei have long provided a testing ground for nuclear models. Most of the basic ideas were already in place by the end of the 1950’s as can be seen from a perusal of the proceedings of the Kingston conference in 1960  and a recent history of the development of our understanding of nuclear structure by Wilkinson  (this reference lists the important papers and outlines subsequent developments).

As far as the shell model was concerned , the fractional parentage coefficients for the p shell in both $`jj`$ and LS coupling had been available since the early 50’s but the slow development of electronic computing meant that it was the mid 50’s before the first diagonalizations (up to $`22\times 22`$) for $`(sd)^3`$ by Elliott and Flowers  and for the complete p shell by Kurath  were published. Excitations across major shells with proper elimination of spurious centre-of-mass states were considered by Elliott and Flowers for $`A=16`$ . This paper also provided a microscopic description of giant dipole strength in 16O. The presence of non-normal-parity states at low excitation energy was known in 19F at 110 keV (suggested as the weak coupling of a $`0p_{1/2}`$ proton hole to 20Ne ), in 13N at 2.4 MeV (the weak coupling of an $`1s_{1/2}`$ proton to 12C ), and a $`\frac{1}{2}^+`$ ground state for 11Be was strongly suspected . In the appropriate limits, the close connection between the shell model and the cluster model and between the shell model and the collective (Nilsson) model was known, the latter being made clear from Elliott’s formulation of the SU(3) shell model ; also the need for and basic origin of effective interactions and charges.

Of course, the information on spins, parities, and other properties of nuclear levels was still rather sparse . The next few decades brought a rapid filling out of this basic knowledge, as may be traced through the succeeding tabulations . In recent years, the advent of radioactive beam facilities has greatly improved our knowledge of the structure of nuclei far from stability, out to the drip lines and beyond in the case of light nuclei.

The purpose of this paper is to interpret the structure of light nuclei up to $`Z8`$ in terms of the shell model, using where necessary its relation to the cluster, Nilsson, and weak-coupling models to provide a simple understanding of the structure. In principle the shell model is complete and in practice it can be used phenomenologically to correlate rather precisely the systematics of nuclear properties over considerable ranges of mass number. For some mass numbers, the tabulations are up to 12 years out of date but the general flavour of advances in the field can be obtained from recent major conferences such as ENAM98 , recent reviews on specific topics , and the most recent references to specific nuclei (given later).

## 2 Structure Calculations

Large scale $`0\mathrm{}\omega `$ shell-model calculations have now reached close to the middle of the $`pf`$ shell . These results, obtained using a G-matrix interaction with monopole modifications, have also been used to benchmark shell-model Monte Carlo calculations  which can be used for even larger model spaces. Both types of calculations have been employed for neutron rich nuclei involving both the $`sd`$ and $`pf`$ shells  where some ground states involve the excitation of pairs of neutrons across the $`N=20`$ shell closure. Similar violations of the normal shell ordering occur at $`N=8`$ . As is discussed later, the structure of such nuclei can be described by shell-model calculations which use two-body matrix elements fitted to $`0\mathrm{}\omega `$, $`1\mathrm{}\omega `$, and $`2\mathrm{}\omega `$ configurations in the $`A=1022`$ nuclei .

Binding energy effects are not taken account in the shell-model calculations themselves. Rather, Woods-Saxon radial wave functions evaluated at the physical separation energy are used to calculate transition matrix elements. Further improvement is possible by using the shell-model structure information to set up radial equations for the appropriate one-nucleon overlap functions .

Microscopic cluster models generally include the correct degrees of freedom to describe extended, loosely bound systems without violating the Pauli principle or introducing spurious center of mass excitations. Recent developments include solutions by the stochastic variational method , antisymmetrized molecular dynamics , molecular orbital methods , and generator cordinate methods . Such calculations use saturating central forces, such as the Volkov or Minnesota interactions, augmented by a spin-orbit interaction. Parameters, such as the space-exchange mixture, are often varied on a case-by-case basis to reproduce energies with respect to thresholds for states of interest.

Finally, there have been great advances in the theoretical treatment of few-nucleon systems  and some of the techniques can be used for p-shell nuclei. In particular, variational Monte Carlo and Green’s function Monte Carlo results using realistic free NN interactions and phenomenological but theoretically motivated NNN interactions have been published up to $`A=8`$ . Very impressive agreement with experiment has been obtained for 6Li$`(e,e^{})^6`$Li form factors  and for 7Li$`(e,e^{}p)^6`$He momentum distributions and spectroscopic factors . The last result emphasises the essential quasi-particle nature of the shell model and the role played by (short-range) correlations .

## 3 The p-shell nuclei

A comprehensive description and understanding of the structure of p-shell (0$`\mathrm{}\omega `$) states is important both in its own right and because neutrons in sd-shell orbits are added to p-shell cores as one moves towards the drip line or higher in excitation energy for many light elements. In fact, there is often near degeneracy, or coexistence, of nominally 0$`\mathrm{}\omega `$, 1$`\mathrm{}\omega `$, 2$`\mathrm{}\omega `$, etc. states.

It should be noted that Barrett and collaborators have performed ab initio no-core shell-model calculations in at least 4$`\mathrm{}\omega `$ spaces up to $`A=12`$ with effective interactions derived microscopically from realistic NN interactions . The spectra for known p-shell levels are good. To date, however, the non-normal-parity states, and consequently all multi-$`\mathrm{}\omega `$ states, are predicted too high in energy.

At the beginning of the p-shell, the wave functions for the observed states have long been known to be close to the supermultiplet (LS) limit in which the orbital wave functions are classified by the SU(3)$``$O(3) quantum numbers $`(\lambda \mu )K_LL`$ ($`\lambda =f_1f_2`$ and $`\mu =f_2f_3`$ from the spatial symmetry $`[f]=[f_1f_2f_3]`$) and the SU(4)$``$SU(2)$`\times `$SU(2) quantum numbers \[$`\stackrel{~}{f}`$\]$`\beta TS`$ (see, e.g., Barker’s wave functions for $`A=69`$ ). In fact, the supermultiplet scheme provides an excellent basis for an understanding of the structure and energetics of all p-shell nuclei. This can be demonstrated from an analysis of a p-shell Hamiltonian obtained by fitting 34 levels for $`A=1012`$. In the fit only a limited number of well-determined linear combinations of the parameters were allowed to vary. The single-particle energies were always well determined, as were the central matrix elements with the exception of the singlet-odd interaction. The strength of the tensor interaction was fixed to obtain, in competition with the spin-orbit interaction, the sign and magnitude of the $`{}_{}{}^{3}S_{1}^{}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{3}D_{1}^{}`$ mixing in the 6Li and 14N ground states necessary to explain the small Gamow-Teller matrix element in 14C $`\beta `$ decay and a small negative quadrupole moment for 6Li. The spin-orbit splitting of 4.78 MeV (3.49 MeV for a similar $`A=69`$ fit) is much larger than that of the Cohen-Kurath interactions  for the light p-shell nuclei.

The calculations were performed with an SU(3) shell-model code based on the formalism of French  adapted for SU(3) . From the coefficients of the six $`(\mathrm{0\hspace{0.17em}0})`$ and $`(\mathrm{2\hspace{0.17em}2})`$ SU(3) tensors which define the central interaction, it is possible find the coefficients of the 5 SU(4) invariants which characterize the symmetry-preserving part of the interaction . This decomposition, including the contribution from the one-body centroid, is given below. The coefficient of the sixth tensor is essentially zero so that the central interaction is almost perfectly symmetry preserving.

$$H=1.563n1.709I_{ij}3.908P_{ij}+0.590L^21.078S^2+0.594T^2$$
(1)
For the spatial symmetry $`[f]=[f_1f_2f_3]`$, the expectation value of the space-exchange interaction $`P_{ij}`$ is $`\frac{1}{2}_if_i(f_i2i+1)=n_sn_a`$, where $`n_sn_a`$ is the difference between the number of symmetric and antisymmetric pairs.

The binding energies given by Eq. (1) for the lowest p-shell states in nuclei of interest are shown in Fig. 1. As can be seen, the dominant contributor to the spacing between the nuclei with different isospins is the space-exchange interaction. These spacings are more or less conserved when the non-central interactions are switched on with admixings of $`<30`$% (often much less) of lower symmetry into the lowest states throughout the p shell. For example, the ground state of 12C is typically $`80`$%  symmetry (LS = 00), as we might expect for a nucleus that we can think of as 3 $`\alpha `$ particles, with a  admixture (LS = 11) of $`16`$% induced by the spin-orbit interaction. This admixture provides the Gamow-Teller (GT) transition strengths in the $`\beta `$ decay of 12B or 12N. The closed $`p_{3/2}`$ shell forms $`<40`$% of the ground-state wave function (the overlap of $`p_{3/2}^8`$ with  is only $`\sqrt{5/81}`$ ).

With regard to the smaller angular momentum and isospin dependent terms in Eq. (1), the $`L^2`$ term gives the well-known $`L(L+1)`$ dependence exhibited by the p-shell interaction. The influence of the $`S^2`$ and $`T^2`$ terms can be seen in the strong low-energy Gamow-Teller transitions observed in the high $`Q_\beta `$ decays of 8He, 9Li, and 11Li. In the case of 8He decay ($`Q_\beta =10.653`$ MeV) , the lowest three $`1^+`$ states of 8Li have small GT matrix elements because the wave functions have dominantly  spatial symmetry (mixed LS = 10, 11, 21) but the $`1_4^+`$ state near 9 MeV has a large GT matrix element corresponding to the transition $`|[22]L`$=0$`S`$=0$`T`$=2$`|[22]L`$=0$`S`$=$`1T`$=1$``$. The intensities of these configurations in the initial and final states are 74.0% and 71.5%, respectively, and the influence of the $`S^2`$ and $`T^2`$ terms in lowering the $`1_4^+`$ state below the analog of the initial state at 10.822 MeV in 8Li is clear. Similarly, in the decay of 11Li ($`Q_\beta =20.7`$ MeV) , the strong transition is between states of  symmetry with $`L=1`$ to a state just above 18 MeV in 11Be. The main candidate is a $`\frac{5}{2}^{}`$ state predicted at 17.8 MeV with 87% by intensity of  symmetry with $`S=\frac{3}{2}`$. An essentially degenerate $`\frac{3}{2}^{}`$ level is also predicted to carry significant GT strength. The predicted p-shell GT values are strongly quenched by large $`(sd)^2`$ admixtures in the 11Li ground state .

Another important aspect of the underlying supermultiplet symmetry for p-shell states is how it influences parentage, single-nucleon or multi-nucleon, and therefore the magnitudes of cross sections for transfer reactions and the widths of unbound levels. Before turning to p-shell properties of interest for some of the He, Li, and Be istopes, a brief discussion of these matters is given in the following subsection.

### 3.1 Parentages and widths

For unbound states with modest widths an excellent way to estimate the nucleon decay width at energy $`E_N`$ above threshold is given by

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_N=C^2S\mathrm{\Gamma }^{sp}(E_N),$$
(2)
where $`E_Ni\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{sp}`$ is the complex resonance energy for a potential well , e.g. a Woods-Saxon well with $`r_01.25`$ fm and $`a0.6`$ fm, with a depth chosen to reproduce $`E_N`$. The spectroscopic factor $`S`$ is the square of the matrix element of a creation operator between initial and final states and $`C`$ is the isospin Clebsch-Gordan coefficient. In a schematic form, between basis states for $`n`$ particles in a shell,

$$n|||a^{}|||n1=\sqrt{n}n1,1|\}n$$
(3)
where the coefficients of fractional parentage (cfp’s) are products of weight factors and Clebsch-Gordan coefficients for SU(3)$``$O(3) and SU(4)$``$SU(2)$`\times `$SU(2) . The weight factors $`\sqrt{\frac{n_f^{}}{n_f}}`$ are particularly important because they give the branching to states of final symmetry \[$`f^{}`$\] which can be reached from an initial symmetry \[$`f`$\]. If more than one \[$`f^{}`$\] is allowed, there will be parentage to widely separated states of the $`A1`$ core nucleus. For example, for $`A=13`$ the weights for $``$ and  are $`\sqrt{\frac{1}{4}}`$ and $`\sqrt{\frac{3}{4}}`$, respectively. On the other hand, nucleon removal from 12C leads only to the $`\frac{3}{2}_1^{}`$, $`\frac{1}{2}_1^{}`$, and $`\frac{3}{2}_2^{}`$ states of 11C or 11B because $``$ is the only possibility. For $`N>Z`$, the sum rule $`C^2S(T_>)=Z`$ applies for proton removal, with the $`T_>`$ states generally belonging to a different \[$`f^{}`$\] from the $`T_<`$ states, while both $`T_<`$ and $`T_>`$ states contribute for neutron removal.

It is very easy to generate spectroscopic amplitudes for multinucleon transfer from the one-particle cfp’s of Eq. (3). For 3 and 4 nucleon removal, it is assumed that the $`k`$ nucleons have maximum spatial symmetry \[$`k`$\], which can be projected onto a $`(0s)^k`$ internal wave function for the cluster. Amplitudes for $`14`$ nucleon transfer have been tabulated  for the Cohen and Kurath wave functions. The generalization to other major shells and mixed major shells is straightforward.

### 3.2 The He isotopes

There is now considerable evidence for a number of relatively narrow excited excited states in 8-10He . The positions of the lowest narrow states in 9He and 10He are consistent with the p-shell expectations of Ref.  and this work. The widths of 5He$`(\frac{3}{2}_1^{})`$, 7He$`(\frac{3}{2}_1^{})`$, and 8He$`(2_1^+)`$ calculated according to Eq. (2) are in good agreement with the experimental values. However, the nominally $`p_{1/2}`$ state ($`S(th)=0.650.83`$) at $`1.131.27`$ MeV above threshold in 9He  is predicted to have a width in excess of 1 MeV, which more than a factor of 2 larger than is reported. Very recently, strong evidence has been obtained that the ground state of 9He is an unbound s-state with a scattering length of $`10`$ fm . The WBP and WBT interactions  predict that the $`\frac{1}{2}^+`$ state should be lowest  followed by a $`\frac{1}{2}^{}`$ state, and a $`\frac{5}{2}^+`$, $`\frac{3}{2}^{}`$ pair 2.2 and 2.4 MeV above the $`\frac{1}{2}^+`$ state; Poppelier et al. make very similar predictions . The $`\frac{5}{2}^+`$ state could correspond to the second state seen in the 9Be(14C,14O)9He reaction  at $`E_n=S_n2.4`$ MeV ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }_d^{sp}=624`$ keV). In any case, transfer reactions of this type should populate a number of narrow states of the form 8He($`0^+,2^+`$)$`(sd)`$. The presence of the low-lying sd states in 9He clearly has implications for the structure of 10He.

Recently, an excited state of 7He which decays mainly into the $`{}_{}{}^{4}\mathrm{He}+3n`$ channel has been observed via the $`p(^8\mathrm{He},d)^7`$He reaction  at $`E_x=2.9(3)`$ MeV with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=2.2(3)`$ MeV. The p-shell $`\frac{5}{2}^{}`$ state, which is predicted slightly higher in energy, has the correct decay properties but must be produced via a two-step process . Also, a broad state at $`3.2`$ MeV is seen in the 9Be(15N,17F)7He reaction and assigned $`J^\pi =\frac{1}{2}^{}`$ . However, a $`\frac{1}{2}^{}`$ state at this energy would be exceedingly broad and, in addition, the calculated spectroscopic factor for two-proton pickup from 9Be is vanishingly small. The $`\frac{5}{2}^{}`$ state, on the other hand, has a substantial L=2, S=0 two-proton spectroscopic factor.

### 3.3 The Li isotopes

There have been many investigations of the unbound nucleus 10Li. These are summarized in recent works which confirm the existence of s-wave strength near threshold  and a p-wave resonance at 500 keV above threshold with a width of 400(60) keV . Shell-model calculations predict a low-lying $`1^+`$, $`2^+`$ doublet separated by only 23 keV for the $`A=1012`$ interaction (and 169 keV for the $`A=69`$ interaction) with $`S=0.98`$ and $`0.71`$, respectively. At $`E_n=500`$ keV, the predicted width for the $`1^+`$ state is 375 keV; a slightly narrower, nearly degenerate $`2^+`$ state could also be populated in the experiments. The 10Be(12C,12N)10Li reaction shows evidence for states at $`E_n=0.24`$, 1.40, and 4.19 MeV .

Based on the evidence from 10Li and general systematics, states of the form 9Li(0$`\mathrm{}\omega `$)$`(sd)^2`$ and 10Li(0$`\mathrm{}\omega `$)$`(sd)`$ are expected close in energy to the simple p-shell $`\frac{3}{2}^{}`$ configuration for 11Li. Indeed, the interactions of Warburton and Brown  predict essential degeneracy of the lowest 0$`\mathrm{}\omega `$ and 2$`\mathrm{}\omega `$ configurations in 11Li (and 12Be). The evidence from 11Li $`\beta `$ decay for strong mixing has already been mentioned and an analysis of a fragmentation experiment  comes to the same conclusion. There is also evidence for a number of relatively narrow excited states  which are necessarily not of p-shell origin and must be explained by any realistic structure calculation.

### 3.4 The Be isotopes

Many years ago, Kurath and Pic̆man  showed that the lowest p-shell states generated using a central plus one-body spin-orbit interaction had an essentially perfect overlap with states projected from a Slater determinant of the lowest Nilsson orbits for a Nilsson Hamiltonian with the same spin-orbit interaction as the shell model and a deformation that varied in a very regular way throughout the p-shell. In cases where two bands with different $`K`$ lie close together, linear combinations of the two $`J`$-projected states reproduce the two corresponding shell-model states. In Elliott’s SU(3) model , states with good orbital angular momentum are obtained by projection from a Slater determinant, or linear combination thereof, of asymptotic Nilsson orbits. In the case of non-zero intrinsic spin, Elliott and Wilsdon  projected states with good $`J`$ and $`K_J=K_L+K_S`$ from a product of the SU(3) intrinsic state and the intrinsic spin wave function. The $`J`$-projected states correspond to a well-defined linear combination of $`L`$-projected LS-coupling states. In the shell model, the spin-orbit interaction drives the mixture of states with different $`L`$. Of course, the spin-orbit interaction also mixes different SU(3) representations through its (1 1) tensor character. In the supermultiplet, or SU(3), basis it is very easy to see the band structure and to check the degree to which $`K_J`$ is a good quantum number.

The first $`K=\frac{1}{2}`$ orbit for prolate deformation is filled at 8Be and the interplay of the remaining $`K=\frac{3}{2}`$ and $`K=\frac{1}{2}`$ orbits can be seen beyond $`A=8`$. 9Be has a $`K=\frac{3}{2}`$ ground-state band with $`L=1`$ and $`L=2`$ in the ratio $`\sqrt{\frac{21}{26}}`$ to $`\sqrt{\frac{5}{26}}`$ in the SU(3) limit (the same is true for 11B). For $`A=10`$, two particles in the $`K=\frac{3}{2}`$ orbit give rise to the $`K=3`$ ground-state band of 10B for $`T=0`$ ($`S=1`$) and to the $`K=0`$ ground-state band of 10Be for $`T=1`$ ($`S=0`$). In the latter case, promoting one neutron to the next $`K=\frac{1}{2}`$ orbit gives the $`K=2`$ bandhead at 5.958 MeV, as shown in Fig. 3. The reason for the very strong population of this state via a Gamow-Teller transition in the (t,3He) reaction on 10B  can be seen from the $`L`$ decomposition of the pure $`K_L=2`$, $`K_S=1`$ 10B ground state,

$$|^{10}\mathrm{B}3^+K_J=3=\sqrt{\frac{6}{7}}|L=2\sqrt{\frac{3}{22}}|L=3+\sqrt{\frac{1}{154}}|L=4,$$

as can the reason for the excitation of the $`K_L=2`$, $`3^+`$ state at 9.40 MeV. The 3.37-MeV $`2^+`$ state is seen weakly, some $`K`$ mixing of the $`2^+`$ states being necessary to ensure the near equality of the $`2_1^+0^+`$ E2 (isoscalar) transitions in 10Be and 10C . The $`2^+`$ state near 9.6 MeV in Fig. 3 is seen in proton pickup from 11B  and corresponds to a p-shell state with  symmetry. States with  symmetry are also predicted near 10 MeV but they would have very large neutron decay widths. The near degeneracy of the 1$`\mathrm{}\omega `$ and 2$`\mathrm{}\omega `$ configurations has long been known  and is nicely reproduced in a number of recent cluster model calculations .

For the last three neutrons in 11Be, one expects bands formed from $`(K=\frac{3}{2})^2`$ $`(K=\frac{1}{2})`$ and $`(K=\frac{3}{2})(K=\frac{1}{2})^2`$ intrinsic states. In the shell-model the corresponding bands in the SU(3) limit have $`(\lambda \mu )=(\mathrm{2\hspace{0.17em}1})`$ ( spatial symmetry) with $`K_L=1`$ and $`K_S=\pm \frac{1}{2}`$; the details are shown in Table 1, where it can be seen that the wave functions are indeed dominantly of  symmetry with $`K=\frac{1}{2}`$. With respect to identifying experimental candidates for these states, the tabulation  is misleading since the spin and parity assignments are based on $`(t,p)`$ angular distributions contradicted by later work . Pickup reactions from heavier p-shell nuclei provide a clean way to identify dominantly p-shell states. In the 13C$`(^6`$Li$`,^8`$B$`)^{11}`$Be reaction , the $`\frac{1}{2}^{}`$ state and states at 2.69 MeV and 4.0 MeV are seen. Also, four $`T=\frac{3}{2}`$ states in 11B have been identified via the 14C$`(p,\alpha )^{11}`$B reaction , the first three of which were identified with first $`\frac{1}{2}^{}`$, $`\frac{3}{2}^{}`$, and $`\frac{5}{2}^{}`$ states, the latter two at 2.37 MeV and 3.58 MeV relative to the first. The shell-model spectroscopic amplitudes are consistent with the assignments from these two reactions. The strong branch to 2.69-MeV level in the $`\beta `$ decay of 11Li  is model-independent evidence of negative parity for this level.

The level scheme for states below 4 MeV shown in Fig. 3 is the same as that from Liu and Fortune’s analysis of the 9Be$`(t,p)^{11}`$Be reaction  with the exception of the 3.956-MeV level. However, the $`L=2`$ angular distribution observed for this level is consistent with a $`\frac{5}{2}^{}`$ assignment and the discussion in the previous paragraph indicates that one of the two levels in this region is the first p-shell $`\frac{5}{2}^{}`$ level. Charge-exchange reactions also see strength in this region . The ratios of strengths to the 0.32 and 2.69 levels, and to the 3.9 MeV region in 11Li$`(\beta ^{})`$ decay  is consistent with the shell-model prediction although there is some uncertainty over the the division of strength between the 3.89 and 3.96 MeV levels. The authors of Ref.  favour an interchange of the $`\frac{3}{2}^{}`$ and $`\frac{3}{2}^+`$ assignments for the 3.41 and 3.89 MeV levels in Fig. 3. However, the width of the 3.41 MeV level is over 100 keV  and this is inconsistent with the small $`d_{3/2}`$ spectroscopic predicted for the lowest $`\frac{3}{2}^+`$ level and the calculated d-wave single-particle width of 144 keV. The predicted width for the p-shell $`\frac{5}{2}^{}`$ level at 3.96 MeV is 17 keV for S($`2^+`$) = 0.66 compared with the experimental value of 15(5) keV; a slightly smaller value S($`2^+`$) = 0.49 is required to give the observed width of 201(10) keV for the apparent analog in 11B.

All three states of the $`K^\pi =\frac{1}{2}^{}`$ band have large parentages for neutron removal from 12N. The proton spectrum which results from the decay of the resulting 11N states has been studied  and can be qualitatively reproduced using the calculated decay widths for the p-shell states of 11N.

An important point is that the parentage for neutron removal from the  symmetry p-shell states is complex because the parentage to the allowed symmetries , , and  is divided in the ratio 9:10:16. The model independent sum rules for S($`T_<`$) and S($`T_>`$) are 4.5 and 2.5. Of the $`C^2S=5`$ for neutrons, 0.5 must go to $`T=2`$ states at $`22`$ MeV excittion energy in 10Be, 1.8 to  states, and 2.0 to  states. For the lowest $`\frac{1}{2}^{}`$ state, about 2.2 of the parentage goes to the ground state and the first two $`2^+`$ states and about 1.6 to states in the $`913`$ MeV energy range, so that there is a small redistribution of strength from the pure symmetry limit. This parentage is necessary for a properly antisymmetric $`\frac{1}{2}^{}`$ wave function so that one should be suspicious of particle-core coupling models for the $`\frac{1}{2}^{}`$ state which include only the lowest $`0^+`$ and $`2^+`$ core states. In fact, the shell-model parentage is considerably larger to the second $`2^+`$ state than to the first, as one might guess from the Nilsson model picture of the states involved; the spectroscopic factors for the $`0_1^+`$, $`2_1^+`$, and $`2_2^+`$ states of the core are 0.75, 0.45 and 1.00 (0.63, 0.65, and 0.93 for the (8-16)2BME interaction of Cohen and Kurath ). In contrast the parentage for the $`\frac{1}{2}^+`$ ground state of 11Be is mainly to the first $`0^+`$ and $`2^+`$ states with $`K_L=0`$.

That many of the known states of 12Be are mainly of $`(sd)^2`$ character was suggested long ago and is rather obvious from an analysis of 10Be$`(t,p)`$ data and the resultant comparison with known $`(sd)^2`$ states in 14C and 16C . For 13Be and 14Be, neutrons have to occupy sd orbits.

## 4 Non-normal parity states in the p-shell

States with a nominal 1$`\mathrm{}\omega `$ excitation energy are formed by $`0s0p`$ and $`0p1s0d`$ excitations with both configurations usually being present to prevent unphysical centre-of-mass excitations but with the latter dominating at low excitation energies. One interaction that has been widely used one due to Millener-Kurath (MK) developed for a study of the $`\beta `$ decay of 14B . The MK interaction was “hand crafted” to give a good account of the relative separation of the $`1s_{1/2}`$ and $`0d_{5/2}`$ centroids as a function of mass number, through 13C and down to 11Be. More attention was given to $`A=11`$ by Teeters and Kurath  and by Millener and collaborators in studies of the the $`\beta `$ decay of 11Be  and the fast E1 transition in 11Be . Warburton and Brown  have subsequently shown that it is possible to obtain a successful fit with an rms deviation of $`330`$ keV to a large number of cross-shell energies from $`A=1022`$, including some for 2$`\mathrm{}\omega `$ configurations.

The lowering of the $`1s_{1/2}`$ orbit with respect to the $`0d_{5/2}`$ orbit is expected for a simple potential well. In shell-model calculations it arises because in the potential energy contributions to the single-particle energies at 17O, the $`0d_{5/2}`$ nucleon interacts more strongly with the $`0p`$ nucleons while the $`1s_{1/2}`$ nucleon interacts more strongly with the $`0s`$ nucleons. The sum of the interactions with both shells of the core is similar at 17O but the $`0d`$ orbit loses attraction relative to the $`1s`$ orbit as p-shell nucleons are removed. In fact, half the difference between the interactions with the full p shell roughly accounts for the 2.65 MeV shift in the relative $`\frac{1}{2}^+`$, $`\frac{5}{2}^+`$ separation between 17O and 11Be. The shift between 17O and 15C is related simply to the properties of the T=1 $`p_{1/2}^1d_{5/2}`$ and $`p_{1/2}^1s_{1/2}`$ interactions which may be read directly from the spectrum of 16N . These four particle-hole matrix elements control the basic energetics of all the heavy carbon and nitrogen isotopes (see Section 5).

Table LABEL:tab:coulomb shows the systematics of energies with respect to neutron thresholds, “Coulomb energies”, decay widths, and dominant weak-coupling components of the proton-rich members of isospin multiplets for 1$`\mathrm{}\omega `$ states from $`A=1117`$ (one exception is that for $`A=14`$ the widths are given for 14N because of the paucity of information, apart from the $`1^{}`$ state, for 14O). All the states have isospin $`T=T_c+\frac{1}{2}`$; states with lower isospin gain considerable binding energy because a higher spatial symmetry is possible. Because the sd-shell nucleon is not restricted by the Pauli Principle, the neutron separation energies show a rather smooth variation with mass number (third column of Table Table LABEL:tab:coulomb), in analogy with the classic example of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ separation energies . The separation energy eventually has to cross zero as the mass number decreases. At the same time, the separation energy for a p-shell neutron is going towards zero as neutrons are added so that there is inevitably competition between (at least) 0$`\mathrm{}\omega `$, 1$`\mathrm{}\omega `$, and 2$`\mathrm{}\omega `$ configurations. The energies of the lowest $`(A2)\nu (sd)^2(0^+)`$ states relative to the two-neutron separation threshold also show a very smooth behaviour, with approximately constant values along isotopic chains; e.g., (6.53, 6.69, 5.47) MeV for 14-16C, (4.54, 4.57, 3.74) MeV for 13-15B, and (2.30, 3.91, 3.67) MeV for 10-12Be.

The Coulomb energies given in Table LABEL:tab:coulomb are not true Coulomb energy differences except for $`T=\frac{1}{2}`$. Rather they reflect the differences between neutron and proton separation energies at either end of the isospin multiplet. The calculated $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_C^{th}`$ for a pure weak-coupling configuration involves choosing the well depth for a Woods-Saxon well of standard geometry to fit the neutron separation energy, then turning on the Coulomb potential of a uniformly charged sphere and computing the proton separation for $`N`$ and $`Z`$ interchanged. For mixed configurations, the calculated $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_C^{th}`$ are weighted by the shell-model parentages, enabling the binding energy of the proton-rich member to be estimated.

To take the example of the 11Be, 11N pair, $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_C^{sp}`$ is 1.58 MeV for a pure $`1s_{1/2}`$ configuration and 2.92 MeV for a $`2_1^+d_{5/2}`$ configuration (15% of the shell-model wave function). $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_C^{sp}`$ is slightly higher still for the remaining 4% of the shell-model wave function. Performing the average puts the 11N ground state 1.34 MeV above the $`{}_{}{}^{10}\mathrm{C}+p`$ threshold. This can be compared with a recent result of $`1.27_{0.05}^{+0.18}`$ MeV from resonance elastic scattering of protons  (see also a result from transfer reactions ). Although the complex resonance energy is close to becoming unstable, the computed width in Table LABEL:tab:coulomb is close to the value of 1.44(20) MeV from the same experiment. All in all, Table LABEL:tab:coulomb shows remarkable agreement with experiment for both energies and widths even in the case of broad states. Encouraged by the similarity in structure and separation energy for 12N($`1_1^{}`$) and 11N($`\frac{1}{2}^+`$), one could also extrapolate the experimental enegies in Table LABEL:tab:coulomb for low $`1s_{1/2}`$ neutron binding energy to make a reliable estimate for the 11N ground state energy.

The differences in Coulomb energies for the $`0p`$, $`1s`$, and $`0d`$ orbits, which are considerable, and their behaviour as a function of binding provide a very sensitive tests of the structure of nuclear states. The well-known Nolan-Schiffer anomaly for Coulomb energies can be bypassed by taking only direct Coulomb energies  with an overall energy scale set by the radius parameter of the single-particle well, as has been done in Table LABEL:tab:coulomb. The agreement with experiment suggests that the shell-model parentages are realistic, including the case of 11Be over which there has been much debate. A recent measurement of $`\mu =1.6816(8)\mu _N`$ for the magnetic moment of 11Be , which is sensitive to the $`2^+d_{5/2}`$ admixture , tends to confirm the MK parentage which gives $`\mu =1.71\mu _N`$ when bare-nucleon g-factors are used. Note that Suzuki et al.  used a a quenched spin g-factor based on the tabulated value of $`\mu =1.315(70)\mu _N`$ for 15C. However, this value appears only in a conference proceedings and I strongly suspect that it is not correct; based on the parentage for 15C ground states in Table LABEL:tab:coulomb, $`\mu (^{15}\mathrm{C})`$ should be closer to the Schmidt value than $`\mu (^{11}\mathrm{Be})`$.

Recent experiments come to the same conclusion about the parentage of the 11Be ground state. Analysis of the one-neutron knockout reaction with coincident detection of $`\gamma `$ rays from the 10Be core  determines that the ground-state spectroscopic factor of 0.74 from the WBP interaction  is consistent with the data; the slightly higher value from the MK interaction would give even better agreement. Likewise, analysis of the 11Be$`(p,d)^{10}`$Be reaction in inverse kinematics leads to a $`2^+d_{5/2}`$ admixture of $`16`$% .

In the one-nucleon knockout reaction $`(^{12}\mathrm{Be},^{11}\mathrm{Be}+\gamma )`$ reaction on a 9Be target , comparable spectroscopic factors are extracted for the bound $`\frac{1}{2}^+`$ and $`\frac{1}{2}^{}`$ states of 11Be explicitly demonstrating the breakdown of the $`N=8`$ shell closure. The shell-model calculations using the WBP interaction  reproduce the data quite well. They also predict substantial parentage to the unbound $`\frac{5}{2}^+`$ state of 11Be . The latter parentage is a warning of the inadequacy, over and above center of mass problems, of calculations which limit the number of $`sd`$ orbits to the $`1s_{1/2}`$ orbit. Even the $`d_{3/2}^2`$ configuration is important because of a large matrix element with $`d_{5/2}^2`$. Proton removal from 13B would provide another way to study the mixing of 0$`\mathrm{}\omega `$ and 2$`\mathrm{}\omega `$ $`0^+`$ and $`2^+`$ states in 12Be, the predicted $`C^2S`$ values for pickup to the lowest p-shell $`0^+`$ and $`2^+`$ being 0.52 and 2.12, respectively. Also in 12Be, a $`1^{}`$ state has been seen at 2.68(3) MeV by observing $`\gamma `$ rays following the inelastic scattering of 12Be on a lead target .

The parentage of 13Be and 14Be to 12Be is clearly complicated by the fact that $`(sd)^2`$ configurations form a substantial component of low-lying states in 12Be. A state in 13Be with probable $`d_{5/2}`$ parentage to 12Be has been located 2.0 MeV above the neutron threshold ; both $`p^8(sd)`$ and $`p^6(sd)^3`$ configurations probably need to be considered. A number of other states have also been seen  including a possible ground state 0.78 MeV above threshold with $`{}_{}{}^{11}\mathrm{Be}(\frac{1}{2}_1^{})(sd)^2`$ as the most likely candidate.

## 5 The heavy boron, carbon, and nitrogen isotopes

From the discussion in the previous section, it is clear that the “stretched isospin” wave functions for a p-shell core plus neutrons in the sd shell can usually be described in terms of a few dominant weak-coupling components involving low-lying states of the core. The same is true for cases involving p-shell proton holes and sd-shell neutrons because then only the weak and repulsive $`T=1`$ particle-hole interaction acts. For the nitrogen and carbon isotopes one can assume to a first approximation that the lowest states are formed by coupling the 15N or 14C ground state to states of the appropriate oxygen isotope. For $`p^m(sd)^n`$ configurations, an estimate of the mass excess can be otained from

$$ME(A)=ME(16m)+ME(16+n)ME(^{16}\mathrm{O})+V_{ph},$$
(4)
where the $`ME`$ denote experimental mass excesses and $`V_{ph}`$ is a weighted average of $`mn`$ particle-hole interactions, dominated by the $`p_{1/2}^1d_{5/2}`$ and $`p_{1/2}^1s_{1/2}`$ interactions, which can be taken from 16N. For a simple monopole interaction of the form $`a+bt_p.t_h`$, $`V_{ph}=mn(a+b/4)`$ and the fact that an essentially constant value for $`a+b/4`$ can be extracted from any of the known heavy C or N isotopes demonstrates the basic consistency of the approximation. Of course there is mixing in a shell-model calculation, a good example being the importance of small $`p_{3/2}^1`$ admixtures for $`\mu (^{18}\mathrm{N}(1^{}))`$, for which two discordant results have been reported .

Two recent experimental studies involving one-neutron removal reactions have used wave functions based on the WBP interaction  in their analysis. The first is a systematic study on 23 neutron-rich psd-shell nuclei with $`Z=59`$ and $`A=1225`$  and the second, with coincident $`\gamma `$-ray detection, is a study of 16,17,19C . In the latter work, the ground-state spins of 17C and 19C are assigned as $`\frac{3}{2}^+`$ and $`\frac{1}{2}^+`$ respectively. This means that the particle-hole interaction inverts the order of the 19O ground-state doublet in 17C but does not lower the configuration involving the 1.472-MeV $`\frac{1}{2}^+`$ state of 19O enough to become the ground state of 17C. However, the converse is true in 19C for the configuration involving the 1.33-MeV $`\frac{1}{2}^+`$ state of 21O.

In the case of the boron isotopes, particle-hole interactions involving a $`p_{3/2}`$ hole necessarily play an important role. The tabulations  show no definite spin-parity assignments for excited states of the core nucleus 13B. Recently, spins of $`\frac{3}{2}^+`$ and $`\frac{5}{2}^+`$ have been suggested for the 3.48 and 3.68 MeV states on the basis of a one-neutron knockout experiment . In addition, a wealth of new information has been obtained on states of 13-16B using multinucleon transfer reactions . For example, the strongest state in one-proton removal, two-neutron addition reactions on 12C leading to 13B is a state at 6.42 MeV. This state almost certainly corresponds to the $`\frac{9}{2}^+`$ T=$`\frac{3}{2}`$ state at 21.47 MeV in 13C which is strongly excited by an M4 transition in inelastic electron scattering. The predicted width for the $`{}_{}{}^{12}\mathrm{B}(2^+)\nu d_{5/2}`$ analog in 13B is 33 keV, which is in excellent agreement with the tabulated width of 36(5) keV. Measurements have also been made for the ground-state moments of a number of the boron isotopes and successfully interpreted in terms of shell-model calculations .

## 6 Discussion

The structure of neutron-rich light nuclei has been discussed in terms of shell-model calculations that include all configurations at a given $`n\mathrm{}\omega `$ level of excitation. Other models which can better take into account the radial degrees of freedom necessary to describe loose binding and clustering effects tend to be applied to specific cases rather than to describe the broad sytematics of nuclear spectra. In any case, the results of these calculations are usually interpreted in terms of the essential shell-model configurations involved.

The major question that has to be addressed in any calculation is how to treat the mixing of configurations which differ in energy by $`2\mathrm{}\omega `$ or more. Certainly, if only the lowest few states of each diagonalized $`n\mathrm{}\omega `$ space are kept and mixed in what might be called an extended coexistence model, good spectra and a good description of the relationships (parentage) between low-lying states in neighbouring nuclei can be achieved. This has been the approach in a number of the cluster-model calculations referenced earlier.

The shell-model runs into consistency problems if diagonalizations are performed in complete $`(0+2)\mathrm{}\omega `$ spaces rather than using the “coexistence” approach . The crux of the matter is that the dominant $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{}\omega =2`$ interaction transforms as a $`(\mathrm{2\hspace{0.17em}0})`$ SU(3) tensor (just as most of $`H`$ in Eq. (1) transforms as $`(\mathrm{0\hspace{0.17em}0})`$ for $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{}\omega =0`$) leading to large matrix elements between quite widely separated configurations and slow convergence as a function of $`\mathrm{}\omega `$. Powerful mathematical techniques exist for the symplectic shell model, a natural extension of Elliott’s SU(3) model, and the cluster model to handle calculations in “vertically” truncated model spaces (see articles in Ref. ). The correlations induced in low-energy wave fucntions can be viewed both as improvements to the radial wave functions between clusters and as an introduction of the RPA-type correlations necessary to satisfy energy-weighted sum rules.

## Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the US Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-AC02-98-CH10886 with Brookhaven National Laboratory. I would like to thank B. Alex Brown for many interesting discussions.