This research paper discuss about the model based predictions of X-rays production cross sections how it influences indipendently from the fluorescence yields, Coster-Kronig transition probabilities, and emission rates observations.

Know about X-Rays (for beginners)

1. X rays produced when high energy particles are bombarded on the element. These hogh energy particle are capable to remove the electron from inner shell of the atom. As a result a vacancy created that is filled by the outer most orbit electron. This transition of electron from high energy state to the lower energy state, emits radiation equal to a specific energy difference E₂-E₁. This radiation is known as characteristic X-rays.
2. Particle Induced X ray Emission (PIXE) is a technique in which high energy protons are bombarded on the element to produce characteristic X- rays.
3. Cross Section term uses for the interaction area that is provided by the target element to the incident particles.
4. Atomic parameters are determined by the experimental results, these are fluorescence yields, Coster-Kronig transition probabilities, emission rates

Introduction:

Theoretical model developed on the basis of some assumptions and experimental observations. In research theory guide the experiment and experimental observation guide the theoretical model.

Several theoretical models have been developed to calculate

1. Ionization cross sections and
2. The subsequent X-ray production cross sections

The predictions of theoretical model and its comparision with the experimental data justified only if the dependent variables are included precisely. Here in this paper author focused on such atomic parameters databases like; fluorescence yields, Coster-Kronig transition probabilities, emission rates which have experimental uncertainties.

In this work it is demonstrated how these values do not allow to decide which model describes more accurately the cross sections, due to a final “theoretical uncertainty” obtained through the propagation of the original uncertainties.

Type of X-Rays

In the begining I have cleared about the characteristic x-rays which is denoted by K-, L- and M- x rays. Below in the refrence section you can find more information about the same [1-5]. No doubt, enough literature available and published related to the measurement of X-ray production cross sections (XRPCS) and derived ionization cross sections (ICS).

In the begining no model is perfect, with passage of time it develops and optimize for universal inputs. Many efforts have been dedicated to develop theories that describe appropriately those phenomena [6 -10].

Theoretical Models:

Some modified models are;

1. United Atom Approximation (UA) [11]
2. Electron Capture by the incoming ion (EC) [12]
3. Multiple Ionization of Atomic Outer Shells (MI) [13]

Sources:

• Journal Name: The source of this article is Journal of Nuclear Physics, Material Sciences, Radiation and Applications.
• Author: J Miranda
• Affiliation: Institute of Physics, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Scientific Research Circuit S/N, Coyoacan-04510, Mexico
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.15415/jnp.2020.72007
• Download This article: Theoretical Predictions of X-Ray Production Cross Sections 

Selected References:

[1] H. Paul and J. Sacher, At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 42, 105(1989).
https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-640X(89)90033-8
[2] A. Kahoul, B. Deghfel, A. Abdellatif and M. Nekkab,Rad. Phys. Chem. 80, 1300 (2011).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2011.06.016
[3] J. Miranda and G. Lapicki, At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 100, 651(2014).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adt.2013.07.003
[4] J. Miranda and G. Lapicki, At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 118, 444 (2018).
[5] L. C. Phinney, J. L. Duggan, G. Lapicki, F. U. Naab, K. Hossain, and F. D. McDaniel J. Phys. B 42, 085202 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1088/0953-4075/42/8/085202
[6] E. Merzbacher and H.W. Lewis, Handbuch der Physik (Springer, Berlin, 1958) p.166.
[7] J. H. McGuire and P. Richard, Phys. Rev. A 8, 1374 (1973).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.8.1374
[8] W. Brandt and G. Lapicki, Phys. Rev. A 23, 1717 (1981).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.23.1717
[9] C. C. Montanari, J. N. Miraglia and N. R. Arista, Phys. Rev. A 66, 042902 (2002).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.66.042902
[10] G. Schiwietz, K. Czerski, M. Roth, F. Staufenbiel, and P.L. Grande, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. B 225, 4 (2004).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nimb.2004.05.041
[11] L. Sarkadi and T. Mukoyama, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. B 61, 167(1991).
https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-583X(91)95456-N
[12] G. Lapicki and F. D. McDaniel, Phys. Rev. A 22, 1896 (1980).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.22.1896
[13] G. Lapicki, R. Mehta, J. L. Duggan, P. M. Kocur, J. L. Price, and F. D. McDaniel, Phys. Rev. A 34, 3813 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.34.3813