100RU 100RH EC DECAY (4.6 M) 1980BA59,1978KI07,1974SI1821NDS 202102
100RU H TYP=FUL$AUT=Balraj Singh and Jun Chen$CIT=NDS 172, 1 (2021)$
100RU2 H CUT=31-Jan-2021$
100RU c 1980Ba59, 1978Ki07, 1974Si18: Measured |g.
100RU c Others: 1986Du04, 1982MaZP
100RU c T{-1/2}({+100}Rh isomer): 1974Si18
100RU c Total decay energy deposit of 70 keV calculated by RADLIST
100RU2c code is in agreement with expected value of 64 keV
100RU cE TI,LOGFT$Due to poor knowledge of (|e+|b{++})/IT ratio, the feedings
100RU2cE and log| {Ift} values are given as approximate values
100RU cE $1362 level: from |g intensity balance, %|e+|b{++}=-0.027 {I14}.
100RU2cE This non-physical result may be due to poor knowledge of |g-ray
100RU3cE intensities from the decay of the 4.6 min {+100}Rh
100RU cG E$From 1980Ba59, |D(E|g) not given by the authors, 0.5 keV assumed
100RU2cG by the evaluators for fitting purpose.
100RU cG E(E)$Placement from the Adopted Gammas
100RU cG E(C)$2000Ge01 point out that a |g ray close to this energy in
100RU2cG (|a,2n|g) experiment shows coincidence in 687|g gate, suggesting that
100RU3cG 1536|g may be from a level near 2762 keV
100RU cG M,MR$From the Adopted Gammas.
100RU cL E$From least-squares fit to E|g data, assuming |D(E|g)=0.5 keV for
100RU2cL each |g ray
100RU cL J$From the Adopted Levels
100RH P 107.59 20 (5+) 4.6 M 2 3636 18
100RH cP E,J,T$From {+100}Rh Adopted Levels
100RH cP QP$From 2017Wa10
100RU N 0.990 3 0.017 AP58.82
100RU cN NR$from I(|g+ce)(540|g+1362|g)=100. The branching through this decay
100RU2cN is |?1.7% (1980Ba59). No direct |b{++},|e feeding expected to g.s.
100RU cN BR$from decay of {+100}Rh (4.6 min) and growth of {+100}Rh (20.8 h)
100RU2cN (1980Ba59). From 1986Du04, deduced branching=3.5%. Others: 1978Ki07,
100RUxcN 1974Si18
100RU PN 1.0 3
100RU G 1380.5 1.8 3
100RU L 0.0 0+
100RU L 539.6 4 2+
100RU G 539.6 100 9 E2 0.00428
100RUS G KC=0.00373 6$LC=0.000456 7$MC=8.37E-5 12$
100RUS G NC=1.339E-5 19$OC=6.52E-7 10
100RU L 1226.7 5 4+
100RU E 0.42 AP 0.45 AP 5.8 AP 0.87 AP
100RUS E EAV=663.3 81$CK=0.450 9$CL=0.0554 11$CM+=0.01305 25
100RU G 686.9 60 E2 0.00221
100RUS G KC=0.00193 3$LC=0.000230 4$MC=4.22E-5 6$
100RUS G NC=6.78E-6 10$OC=3.41E-7 5
100RU L 1362.1 4 2+
100RU G 822.5 1.2 6 E2+M1 +3.7 3
100RU G 1362.1 1.0 3 E2
100RU L 1881.3 7 3+
100RU E 0.004 AP 0.03 AP 6.8 AP 0.03 AP ?
100RUS E EAV=372.9 79$CK=0.763 7$CL=0.0945 9$CM+=0.02225 21
100RU cE $Expected |b{++}+|e feeding is zero for a |DJ=(2), |D|p=(no)
100RU2cE |b transition
100RU G 1341.6 1.8 7 M1+E2 +5.7 5
100RU L 2063.1 5 4+
100RU E 0.004 AP 0.07 AP 6.3 AP 0.07 AP
100RUS E EAV=293.9 78$CK=0.820 5$CL=0.1017 6$CM+=0.02396 14
100RU G 701.2 3.3 3 E2
100RU G 836.4 3.1 3 M1+E2 +1.73 21
100RU G 1523.7 1.6 2 E2
100RU L 2075.3 7 ?
100RU cL E$this level is questionable (see comment for 1535.6|g)
100RU E 0.016 AP 0.29 AP 5.6 AP 0.31 AP ?
100RUS E EAV=288.7 78$CK=0.823 5$CL=0.1021 6$CM+=0.02405 14
100RU G 1535.6 19 1 C ?
100RU L 2075.7 12 6+ ?
100RU cL $Level suggested by evaluators from the Adopted Levels
100RU E 0.00051AP 0.0095 AP 7.1 AP 0.010 AP ?
100RUS E EAV=288.5 78$CK=0.823 5$CL=0.1021 6$CM+=0.02405 14
100RU G 849 0.6 LE E2 E ?
100RU L 2313.6 5 (3-,4+)
100RU cL E$level considered as questionable by 2000Ge01 since none
100RU2cL of the three transitions seen in their (|a,2n|g) experiment
100RU E 0.00053AP 0.055 AP 6.2 AP 0.056 AP
100RUS E EAV=186.0 78$CK=0.8584 15$CL=0.10691 22$CM+=0.02520 6
100RU G 951.5 0.5 3
100RU G 1087.1 0.7 3
100RU G 1773.9 2.1 3
100RU L 2324.9 6
100RU cL E$level considered as questionable by 2000Ge01 since 262.3|g
100RU2cL is placed from a 2968 level and 1097.8|g is not seen
100RU3cL in their (|a,2n|g) experiment
100RU E 0.00066AP 0.076 AP 6.1 AP 0.077 AP
100RUS E EAV=181.1 78$CK=0.8592 14$CL=0.10704 21$CM+=0.02523 5
100RU G 262.3 3.7 6 [D,E2] 0.026 16
100RU G 1097.8 0.9 3
100RU L 2367.3 6 4+
100RU E 0.0025 AP 0.46 AP 5.3 AP 0.46 AP
100RUS E EAV=162.8 78$CK=0.8618 10$CL=0.10744 16$CM+=0.02532 4
100RU G 1140.7 3.6 3
100RU G 1827.5 24 2 E2