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