108PD 108AG EC DECAY (2.382 M) 1973SI02 ENSDF 200810 108PD H TYP=FUL$AUT=Jean Blachot$CIT=ENSDF$CUT=1-Jul-2008$ 108PD H TYP=FUL$AUT=Jean Blachot$CIT=NDS 91, 135 (2000)$CUT=1-Jun-2000$ 108PD c %|e+%|b{++}={ 2.85 {i20}} 108PD c See also {+108}Ag |b{+-} decay ({ 2.382 min}) 108PD c The decay scheme is that proposed by 1973Si02 on the basis of 108PD2c energy fits and extensive |g|g coin studies 108PD cE TI From I(|g+ce)-imbalance at each level 108PD cG E From 1973Si02, except for the 434|g. Others: 1971Jo07, 108PD2cG 1971Ok01, 1971Si07 108PD cG RI From 1973Si02. Others: 1971Jo07, 1971Ok01, 1971Si07 108PD CL $ |g|g(|q): 1) (619|g)(434|g)(|q) (1971Ok01,1973Si02), 108PD2CL 2) (880|g)(434|g)(|q) (1973Si02), 108PD3CL 3) (1007|g)(434|g)(|q) (1971Ok01,1973Si02). 108PD cL Data from cascade 1) are consistent with the spin 108PD4cL sequence J(d,Q)2(Q)0 only for J(1053 level)=0. Data from 108PD5cL cascade 2) are consistent with the spin sequence J(d,Q)2(Q)0 108PD6cL only for J(1314 level)=0. Data from cascade 3) are consistent with 108PD7cL the spin sequence J(d,Q)2(Q)0 only for J(1441 level)=2. Data of 108PD8cL 1973Si02 yield |d(1007|g)=+{ 7 {I+9-3}}, whereas data of 1971Ok01 yield 108PD9cL |d=-0.27. 1973Si02 suggest that the discrepancy may be due to random 108PDAcL summing of |g{+|+} radiation contributing to the 1007 peak in the work 108PDBcL of 1971Ok01 since these authors used large NaI detectors. We adopt 108PDCcL the value from 1973Si02. 108AG P 0.0 1+ 2.382 M 11 1922 5 108PD N 0.175 0.0285 2035.09 108PD cN NR$branching from I(|b{+-} to g.s.)+I(633|g)+I(|b{++} to 108PD2cN g.s.)(1+|e/|b{++})+ I(434+931+1441+1540|g's)=100 and 108PD3cN I(633|g)/|b{+-}=0.0181 {i10} (1962Fr07), I(|b{++})/I(633|g)=0.160 {i7} 108PD4cN (1962Fr07) and |e/|b{++}(g.s.)=7.33 {i22} (theory). The data quoted 108PD5cN from 1962Fr07 are not given explicitly by the authors although they 108PD6cN are the quantities determined experimentally. The values were deduced 108PD7cN by the evaluator from the |b{+-}, |b{++} and |e branchings given by the 108PDxcN authors. 108PD PN 1.0 108PD L 0.0 0+ STABLE 108PD E 0.28 2 2.07 16 4.70 3 2.35 16 108PDS E EAV= 398 3$CK= 0.7610 25$CL= 0.0957 4$CM+= 0.02322 8$ 108PD L 433.938 5 2+ 108PD E 0.0026 3 0.21 2 5.46 4 0.216 20 108PDS E EAV= 209 3$CK= 0.8537 $CL= 0.10809 $CM+= 0.02624 $ 108PD cE |eK(exp)/|b{++}=5.6 {i10} (1965Fr01), |eK(exp)/|b{++}=6.19 108PDxcE (theory) 108PD G 433.96 5 100 108PD L 931.07 12 2+ 108PD G 497.1 2 0.45 11 108PD G 931.12 20 0.11 1 108PD L 1052.80 5 0+ 108PD E 0.259 23 4.89 4 0.259 23 108PDS E CK= 0.8615 $CL= 0.11135 $CM+= 0.02711 $ 108PD G 618.86 5 52.4 26 108PD L 1314.20 10 0+ 108PD E 0.0041 5 6.37 6 0.0041 5 108PDS E CK= 0.8588 $CL= 0.11345 $CM+= 0.02771 $ 108PD G 383.2 10 0.18 6 108PD G 880.26 10 0.64 5 108PD L 1441.16 5 2+ 108PD E 0.020 3 5.46 6 0.020 3 108PDS E CK= 0.8564 $CL= 0.11536 14$CM+= 0.02825 4$ 108PD G 388.6 4 0.37 12 108PD G 510.1 2 0.7 LE 108PD cG E from energy level difference 108PD cG RI from intensity balance at the 931 level. From the 511 108PD2cG peak in coin with the 434|g the authors estimate I(510.1|g)=0.7 {i5}. 108PD G 1007.22 6 2.79 14 (M1+E2) +7 +9-3 108PD cG M from |g|g(|q) and |D|p=no from decay scheme. 108PD G 1441.14 10 0.61 4 108PD L 1539.95 7 (1+,2+) 108PD E 0.0027 3 6.12 6 0.0027 3 108PDS E CK= 0.8532 $CL= 0.11781 23$CM+= 0.02894 7$ 108PD G 1106.00 7 0.33 3 108PD G 1540.0 2 0.21 2