MEMO CP-A/156
27-July-2004
To:Distribution
From: F.E. Chukreev
Subject: Scope of data compilation (See Memos CP-C/336, CP-D/385,CP-A/151, CP-E/043, CP-C/343)

What will be lost, if the EXFOR scope will be limited by
the scope, which has been proposed in CP-C/343?
Let us see first proposal:•“Incident charged particles from A=l-12, and excluding“fundamental” particles (pions, kaons, antiprotons, etc.).”If particles with A>12 will be excluded, then
1.1 We must refuse to help users, which use a littleaccelerators for material investigations, because
heavy ions (Si, S, O etc.) are needed for
Rutherford backscattering method. INDC took ourattention for the problem, constantly.
1.2 We must stop all compilations of the papers, whereinteractions radioactive nuclei have been
investigated, because the experiments use “inverse”
geometry. The investigations are very important tosolve physical and astrophysical problems. The
majority of experimental data, which were measured
in “inverse” geometry must not be compiled too.
1.3 We must stop all compilations of the papers, wherefission of exotic fissioning systems wereinvestigated. But we heard constantly, that physics
of fission is most important problem.
1.4 I would like to support JCPRG opinion (see item 3of CP-E-043). Our experience show, that numerical
data are available short time only after
publication and the data will be lost if goodexperiments with “fundamental” particles will not
be compiled. CAJAD compiled “fundamental” particles
data, when the data are presented in the paper
together with ‘non-fundamental” particles.
Let us see second proposal:•“Incident-projectile energies up to 1 GeV.”
The limit on incident-projectile energies is notsuitable. If a limit is needed, then EN-CM must belimited. For example, PR/C,53,347,1996 contains
data for interaction of neon-20 (beam energy – 6680Mev) with hydrogen target. The data are same as 10Ne-20(p, data for proton energy 334 MeV (Coulombbarrier is negligible for similar energies).
Technical question for proposed limitation:
CP-C/343 contains proposal:“Any center that wishes to compile the data outside the scopeagreed upon should make a proposal and request a new area code. The
scope of these areas must also be defined.

The following area codes are now free: I, J, K, U, W, X, Y.”
The proposal is ad hoc proposal. Today JCPRG andCAJAD can use I and J codes for identification data
outside the scope agreed. But tomorrow somebody
will refuse to include in his data collection, forexample, tensor polarization data. The “somebody”
has the right! Then the seven identification codes
will be exhausted very quickly.
Therefore our proposal to use N3 field of SUBENTRY(or N3 of BIB record) is more suitable. For example,
A in 34 column will designate that EN-CM is larger
than 1 GeV. B in the column will designate, thatEN-CM is larger than 10 GeV etc. 35-th column may
be used, for example, to distinguish integral anddifferential data; 36-th column may be used formass numbers of beam and target etc.
Obviously, our proposal requests additional
responsibility from compilers.

Distribution:
oblozinsky@bnl.gov
nordborg@nea.fr
maev@ippe.obninsk.ru
feliks@polyn.kiae.su
S.Dunaeva@iaea.org

varlamov@depni.sinp.msu.ru
kato@nucl.sci.hokudai.ac.jp
gezg@iris.ciae.ac.cn
tarkanyi@atomki.hu
hasegawa@ndc.tokai.jaeri.go.jp
kaltchenko@kinr.kiev.ua
jhchang@kaeri.re.kr
v.pronyaev@iaea.org
exfor@nea.fr+

vml@bnl.gov
manokhin@ippe.obninsk.ru
Mmarina@ippe.obninsk.ru
chukreev@polyn.kiae.su
taova@expd.vniief.ru
chiba@earth.sgu.ac.jp

yxzhuang@iris.ciae.ac.cn
hongwei@iris.ciae.ac.cn
stakacs@atomki.hu
vlasov@kinr.kiev.ua
ogritzay@kinr.kiev.ua

ohtsuka@nucl.sci.hokudai.ac.jp
schwerer@iaeand.iaea.org