dataesr/scientific-paragraphs-categorization huggingface dataset:
Fixed Ω partitions In version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd, without pairing and for broken simplex symmetry, arbitrary partitions of particles among different Ω blocks were implemented, where Ω denotes the eigenvalue of a given Cartesian component of the single-particle angular momentum on the axial-symmetry axis. To this end, every single-particle state with the calculated projection of the angular momentum equal to Ω i is attributed to a given Ω block if Ω -1 2 ≤ Ω i < Ω + 1 2. Although this attribution can always be performed, it can serve its purpose only if the single-particle states are eigenstates of the given Cartesian component of the angular momentum, that is, their alignments are properly quantized. This requires that (i) the nucleus has an axial shape and (ii) the Kramers degeneracy is lifted by aligning individual angular momenta along the symmetry axis.
Consistency formula between energy and fields Many authors of Hartree-Fock solvers have implemented a consistency formula, which allows one to check, by summing over the energies of the occupied single particle states, that the total energy and the mean-field are consistent in their implementation (see for example  [73, 74] ). Such a formula was also used to define the stability energy employed in the code hfodd as a criterion to terminate iterations, see Eq. (I-37)  [1]. Here we show that the consistency formula can be extended to the case of the HFB calculations and to the energy density which contains linear, bilinear, trilinear, quadrilinear, or possibly higher couplings of densities. Note that this energy density is not necessarily derived from an interaction; it is sufficient that it contains products of densities that are contractions of n creation and n annihilation operators evaluated in a HFB state |Φ.
Corrected errors In version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd, we corrected a few little significant errors and two significant errors, Sections 2. 16. 1 and 2. 16. 2, found in the previous versions of hfodd. 2. 16. 1. Incorrect signs of the Yukawa energies. In the published versions (v2. 08i)  [4] , (v2. 08k)  [5] , (v2. 40h)  [6] , (v2. 49t)  [7] , and (v2. 73y)  [8]  of code hfodd, signs of the Yukawa energies were inverted. This error was corrected in the results published in Ref. [75]. 2. 16. 2. Incorrect off-diagonal generator coordinate method (GCM) kernels. Between versions (v2. 10a) and (v2. 99u), calculations of the off-diagonal GCM kernels were incorrect. The error manifested itself only when the single-particle wave functions were not real, and was present in the published versions (v2.
2. 16. 4. Time-odd symmetries in angular-momentum projection. Before version (v2. 66b), for conserved time-odd symmetries (ISIMTX=1, or ISIMTY=1 or ISIMTZ=1, see Section IV-3. 2  [4] ), the angular-momentum projection was allowed and might give inconsistent results. This error was thus present in the published version (v2. 49t)  [7]  of hfodd and corrected in the published version (v2. 73y)  [8] , however, in the latter publication it was not described. 2. 16. 5. Very large harmonic-oscillator bases. As it turns out, for very large harmonicoscillator bases of NOSCIL>36, see Section II-3. 6  [2] , the code may behave erratically. Therefore, beginning with version (v2. 81b), calculations with NOSCIL>36 are not allowed. This issue awaits future debugging. 2. 16. 6. Inconsistent input data in angular-momentum and isospin projection.
When keywords PROJECTGCM (Section VI-3. 2  [6] ) and PROJECTISO (Section VII-3. 1  [7] ) were simultaneously used in the input data file, the type of calculation performed could depend on the order in which they were used. This contradicted the rules of building the input data file defined in Section II-3  [2]. Moreover, for IPRROT=0 (see Section 3. 9), the remaining input data read under keyword PROJECTGCM were not ignored, which could trigger the AMP against the user's intentions. In version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd, variables • IPRROT (keyword PROJECTGCM), • IPRISO (keyword PROJECTISO), • IPRNUM (keyword PROJPARNUM), • IPRVEC (keyword PROJVECNUM), • IPRPTY (keyword PROJPARITY), must be synchronized, that is, their non-zero values must all be equal one to another. Internally, they are replaced by the single variable IPRGCM.
2. 16. 7. Inconsistent input data in tilted angular momentum. When keywords OMEGA_XYZ and OMEGA_RTP (Section IV-3. 5  [4] ) were simultaneously used in the input data file, the type of calculation performed could depend on the order in which they were used. This contradicted the rules of building the input data file defined in Section II-3  [2]. In version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd, a simultaneous use of these two keywords is not any more allowed. 2. 16. 8. Incorrect information stored on the kernel file. For runs without isospinsymmetry restoration, not all kernels were stored on the kernel file, see Section VI-3. 2  [6] , and nevertheless those not stored were later used in the printouts. This was causing differences between results printed in the runs where the kernels were calculated and those where the kernels were read from the kernel file.
Input Data File The rules of building the input data file were defined in Section II-3  [2] ; in version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd these rules remain exactly the same. All previous items (keywords) of the input data file remain valid, and several new ones were added, as described in Sections 3. 1-3. 7. For some previous items, new features or new values of variables were added (Section 3. 9). For every keyword listed below, we give the default values and names of the variables read. Apart from character variables, which must start at the 13th column of the input line, all other variables are read in the FORTRAN free format. Nevertheless, it is good practice to include in the input file the integer or real constants when reading the.
KETAPA>0 requires NOZEPA=0. In version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd, KETAPA>0 still requires ISIMPY=0, ISIQTY=0, IPNMIX=0, IFTEMP=0, and KETA_T=0. 3. 1. 2. Zero-range three-body gradient terms. Keyword: 3BODYGRAD 0. , 0. , 0. , 0. , 0. , 0 = TGRA10, TGRA11, TGRA20, TGRA21, TGRA22, IGRAIN For IGRAIN=1, the parameters of the three-body gradient force (4) are defined as u 1 =TGRA10, y 1 =TGRA11, u 2 =TGRA20, y 21 =TGRA21, and y 22 =TGRA22. For IGRAIN=0, the values of TGRA10, TGRA11, TGRA20, TGRA21, and TGRA22 are ignored and the three-body gradient force is not taken into account. In a given run of the code hfodd, keyword 3BODYGRAD mast not be simultaneously used with keyword 3BODYGRUY. Keyword: 3BODYGRUY 0. , 0. , 0. , 0. , 0. , 0 = TGRA10, TU1_Y1, TGRA20, TU2Y21, TU2Y22, IGRAIN For IGRAIN=1, parameters of the three-body gradient force (4) are defined as u 1 =TGRA10, u 1 y 1 =TU1_Y1, u 2 =TGRA20, u 2 y 21 =TU2Y21, and u 2 y 22 =TU2Y22.
For IGRAIN=0, the values of TGRA10, TU1_Y1, TGRA20, TU2Y21, and TU2Y22 are ignored and the three-body gradient force is not taken into account. For keyword 3BODYGRUY, values of TGRA10= 0 or TGRA20= 0 are not allowed. In a given run of the code hfodd,.
Zero-range isospin-breaking terms. Keyword: CBR_CC_CL2 0, 0. , 0. , 0. , 0. , 0. , 0. = I_2CBR, T02CBR, X02CBR, T12CBR, X12CBR, T22CBR, X22CBR For I_2CBR=1, class-II ISB terms are included in the calculation with parameters: t II 0 =T02CBR, x II 0 =X02CBR, t II 1 =T12CBR, x II 1 =X12CBR, t II 2 =T22CBR, x II 2 =X22CBR , see Eq. (20). Note, that the interaction of class II requires p-n mixing (IPNMIX=1). In version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd, I_2CBR=1 still requires IPRGCM=0. Keyword: CBR_CC_CL3 0, 0. , 0. , 0. , 0. , 0. , 0. = I_3CBR, T03CBR, X03CBR, T13CBR, X13CBR, T23CBR, X23CBR For I_3CBR=1, class-III ISB terms are included in the calculation with parameters: t III 0 =T03CBR, x III 0 =X03CBR, t III 1 =T13CBR, x III 1 =X13CBR, t III 2 =T23CBR, x III 2 =X23CBR , see Eq. (21). In version (v3.
1  [4] , the corresponding pairing still will be active. For NOZEPA=1, see Section 3. 8, the zero-range pairing is neglected, and the warning is not printed. In version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd, I_REGA>0 still requires IPNMIX=0, IRENMA=0, and IBROYD=0. Keyword: REGUL_PAIR 0 = IREGPA For IREGPA>0, the average pairing energies of the finite-range regularized central pseudopotential (  24 ) or (  47 ) are calculated. For IREGPA=2, the corresponding pairing fields are included in the self-consistent pairing field. Altogether, IREGPA=1 demands calculations of contributions to the pairing energy, whereas I_REGA=2 demands full self-consistent calculations with pairing fields included. For I_REGA=0, the pairing contribution of the finite-range regularized central pseudopotential is ignored. IREGPA>0 requires I_REGA>0 and IPAHFB>0.
In version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd, IREGPA>0 still requires IPNMIX=0, IRENMA=0, and IBROYD=0. Keyword: REGUCOUPLI 100, 0, 1. = IREREJ(1),NREREJ(1),REGWID 0. , 0. , 0. , 0. = REJVCC(1,1),REJVCC(1,2),REJVCC(1,3),REJVCC(1,4) 0. , 0. , 0. , 0. = REJVCC(2,1),REJVCC(2,2),REJVCC(2,3),REJVCC  (2, 4). After reading the first line, the code reads i=IREREJ(1) lines with • four coupling constants W (n) j , B (n) j , H (n) j , and M (n) j per line (for NREREJ(1)<0) and uses pseudopotential  (24)  • four coupling constants W (n) , B (n) , H (n) , and M (n) per line (for NREREJ(1)>0), and uses local pseudopotential  (47). N=2*|NREREJ(1)| denotes the order of expansion (the maximum value of n) and a=REGWID denotes the width of the Gaussian formfactor g a (r), see Section 2. 5. For NREREJ(1)<0, the codes reads the coupling constants corresponding to terms defined in Eqs.
[52]  are then used. For IREREJ(1)=0, NREREJ(1)<0 is not allowed. In a given run of the code hfodd, • keyword REGUCOUPLI must not be simultaneously used with keyword REGUL_TXYZ, • all read values of array IREREJ must be the same and are internally used as variable IREREG, • all read values of array NREREJ must be the same and are internally used as variable N3LORD. Internally, the code uses array REGVCC=REJVCC. To inform the code on whether the coupling constants had been read from the input data file, all elements of array IREREJ are predefined to 100. In version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd, calculations with the nonlocal pseudopotential  (24)  or local pseudopotential  (47)  are implemented up to order N = 4 (N2LO) or N = 6 (N3LO), respectively. Consequently, the only allowed values are -2 ≤ N3LORD ≤ 3.
Array REJTCC contains the strength parameters of Eq. (  26 ), that is, REGVCC(:, 1) = REJTCC(:, 1) REGVCC(:, 2) = REJTCC(:, 1) * REJTCC(:, 2) REGVCC(:, 3) = REJTCC(:, 1) * REJTCC(:, 3) REGVCC(:, 4) = REJTCC(:, 1) * REJTCC(:, 4) Arrays REJERR and REJFAC modify array REGVCC as REGVCC(:, :) = REGVCC(:, :) + REJERR(:, :) * REJFAC(:, :) Such a modification of array REGVCC is performed regardless of whether keyword REGUL_TXYZ or REGUCOUPLI was used to define it. In a given run of the code hfodd, • keyword REGUCOUPLI must not be simultaneously used with keyword REGUL_TXYZ, • all read values of array IREREJ must be the same and are internally used as variable IREREG, • all read values of array NREREJ must be the same and are internally used as variable N3LORD. To inform the code on whether the coupling constants had been read from the input data file, all elements of array IREREJ are predefined to 100.
For NOZEPA=1, see Section 3. 8, the zero-range pairing is neglected, and the warning is not printed. In version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd, I_SEPA>0 still requires IPNMIX=0, IRENMA=0, and IBROYD=0. Keyword: SEPAR_PAIR 0 = ISEPPA For ISEPPA>0, the average pairing energies of the separable pseudopotential (57) are calculated. For ISEPPA=2, the corresponding pairing fields are included in the selfconsistent pairing field. Altogether, ISEPPA=1 demands calculations of contributions to the pairing energy, whereas I_SEPA=2 demands full self-consistent calculations with pairing fields included. For I_SEPA=0, the pairing contribution of the separable pseudopotential is ignored. ISEPPA>0 requires IPAHFB>0. In version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd, ISEPPA>0 still requires IPNMIX=0, IRENMA=0, and IBROYD=0.
Keyword: SEPCOUPLI 0, 0 = IVISEP,N3SERD 0. , 0. , 0. , 0. = SEPVIC(1,1),SEPVIC(1,2),SEPVIC(1,3),SEPVIC  (1, 4)  After reading the first line, the code reads one line with the four coupling constants W , B, H, and M and uses separable pseudopotential  (57). In version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd, only values of i=IVISEP=0 or 1 and n=N3SERD=0 are allowed; other values may become available after higher-order derivative terms are implemented, in analogy to those of the regularised pseudopotential  (24). Unless keyword SEPAR_FORM with NUSEGA>0 is used, the use of keyword SEPCOUPLI implies that the formfactor (  58 ) is composed of one Gaussian only, with the default values of K=NUSEGA=1, A 1 =SEPGAU(1)=1, and a 1 =SEPWID(1)=1. Internally, the code uses variable IRESEP=IVISEP and array SEPVCC=SEPVIC.
In a given run of the code hfodd, keyword SEPCOUPLI must not be simultaneously used with keyword SEP_TXYZ. Keyword: SEP_TXYZ 0, 0 = IVISEP,N3SERD 0. , 0. , 0. , 0. = SEPTIC(1,1),SEPTIC(1,2),SEPTIC(1,3),SEPTIC  (1, 4)  Keyword: SEPCOUPERR 0 = IERSEP 0. , 0. , 0. , 0. = SEPERR(1,1),SEPERR(1,2),SEPERR(1,3),SEPERR  (1, 4)  Keyword: SEPCOUPFAC 0 = IFASEP 0. , 0. , 0. , 0. = SEPFAC(1,1),SEPFAC(1,2),SEPFAC(1,3),SEPFAC  (1, 4)  The three keywords above allow for reading the coupling constants of the separable pseudopotential  (57)  in the format analogous to that used for keyword SEPCOUPLI. Array SEPTIC contains strength parameters t, x, ỹ, and z defining the coupling constants as W = t, B = tx, H = tỹ, and M = tz, that is, SEPVIC(:, 1) = SEPTIC(:, 1) SEPVIC(:, 2) = SEPTIC(:, 1) * SEPTIC(:, 2) SEPVIC(:, 3) = SEPTIC(:, 1) * SEPTIC(:, 3) SEPVIC(:, 4) = SEPTIC(:, 1) * SEPTIC(:, 4) (93) Internally, the code uses variable IRESEP=IVISEP and array SEPVCC=SEPVIC.
Arrays SEPERR and SEPFAC modify array SEPVCC as SEPVCC(:, :) = SEPVCC(:, :) + SEPERR(:, :) * SEPFAC(:, :) Such a modification of array SEPVCC is performed regardless of whether keyword SEP_TXYZ or SEPCOUPLI was used to define it. In version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd, only values of i=IERSEP=IFASEP=IVISEP=0 or 1 and n=N3SERD=0 are allowed. In a given run of the code hfodd, keyword SEP_TXYZ must not be simultaneously used with keyword SEPCOUPLI. Keyword: SEPAR_FORM 1 = NUSEGA 1. , 1. ,. , 1. = SEPWID(1),SEPWID(2),. ,SEPWID(NUSEGA) 1. , 0. ,. , 0. = SEPGAU(1),SEPGAU(2),. ,SEPGAU(NUSEGA) After reading the first line, for K=NUSEGA>0 the code reads two lines with widths a k =SEPWID(k) and amplitudes A k =SEPGAU(k) of Gaussians that define formfactor  (58)  of the separable pseudopotential (57).
IPRGCM>1 with IPAHFB>1 and IONISH=0 requires ITWOBA=1 and NUQEVE=1. In version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd, IPRGCM>1 with IPAHFB>1 and IONISH=0 still requires ISIMPY=0 and ISIQTY=0. Keyword: PROJ_J2_T2 0,0 = KETAJ2, KETAT2 For KETAJ2=1 (KETAT2=1) and IPRGCM>0, the code computes the expectation value of the square of total angular momentum (total isospin) in the projected states. Such a calculation is performed to control the precision of the angular-momentum (isospin) projection. KETAJ2=1 (KETAT2=1) is ignored unless NUBKNO=1 (NBTKNO=1). Either KETAJ2=1 or KETAT2=1 requires ISAKER=0 or 2. Keyword: KERNINVERS 0, 0, = IKEINV,IKEKAR For IKEINV>0 or IKEKAR>0, and for IPRGCM=1, the "right" wave function of the kernel calculated within the diagonal GCM mode, see Section VI-3. 2  [6] , is initially transformed according to one of the D T 2h symmetry operations enumerated for variables INIINV and INIKAR under keyword INI_INVERS in Section VI-3.
Configurations Keyword: AXIALIZE 0 = IAXIAP For |IAXIAP|=1, the code axializes, see Section 2. 11, the particle-hole and pairing (for IPAHFB>0) mean-fields. For IAXIAP=-1, the code in addition axializes the particlehole density matrix and pairing tensor (for IPAHFB>0). For |IAXIAP|=1, ICONTI=1, and IFCONT=0, the code issues a warning to the effect that a smooth continuation of axialized wavefunctions may require continuation from fields, that is, IFCONT=1, see Section VI-3. 8  [6]. In version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd, |IAXIAP|=1 still requires IGOGPA=0 and IAXIAP=-1 is incompatible with the angular-momentum projection (NUBKNO>1). The same as in keyword VACNONANEU but for protons. After reading the first line, the code reads two lines that each contain MXALIN+1 numbers of neutrons LALSIQ(:,0,0) and LALSIQ(:,1,0) in the positive-parity and negativeparity Ω-blocks, respectively, from Ω=-MXALIN/2 to Ω=+MXALIN/2, see Section 2.
In version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd, the names of variables defining the oscillator frequency ω 0 , which are read under keyword SURFAC_PAR, have changed and now read INBASI, IZBASI, and R0PARM, see Section II-3. 5  [2]. This allows for dynamically linking the original variables INNUMB and IZNUMB to neutron and proton numbers IN_FIX and IZ_FIX, see Section II-3. 1  [2] , depending on the value of variable ILIBAS, which has the allowed values of 0, 1, 2, and 3. Namely, • for ILIBAS=1 or ILIBAS=3, INNUMB is set to IN_FIX; otherwise it is set to INBASI, • for ILIBAS=2 or ILIBAS=3, IZNUMB is set to IZ_FIX; otherwise it is set to IZBASI. For example, for ILIBAS=0, the code defines ω 0 (as before) by using variables read under keyword SURFAC_PAR, whereas for ILIBAS=3 it does it by using the neutron and proton numbers IN_FIX and IZ_FIX.
Keyword: NEW_WIGNER 0 = NEWWIG For NEWWIG=0 or 1, version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd uses the old and new method to calculate the Wigner d functions, respectively, see Section 2. 12. Keyword: EVENQPNUMB 0 = NUQEVE For ITWOBA=1 or IPRGCM>0, NUQEVE=1 enforces even numbers of single-particle and quasiparticle states, which is needed for the implementation of the Pfaffian method, see Section 2. 9. In version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd, NUQEVE=1 still requires ISIMPY=0.
Output parameters Keyword: ALLNILABS 0 = INUNIL For INUNIL>0 and IREVIE>0, up to INUNIL=99 non-dominant Nilsson labels are printed for each single-particle state on the REVIEWFILE, see Section II-3. 9  [2]. Keyword: PRINT_ELEC 0 = IELPRI Switch IELPRI defines the type of matrix elements of the electric, magnetic, surface, or Schiff operators between angular-momentum-projected states, which are printed in version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd: • For IELPRI=0, the code prints reduced matrix elements of the operators defined in the code, see Section IV-2. 4  [4]. • For IELPRI=1, the code prints reduced matrix elements of the standard operators that is, the particular units defined in Section IV-2. 4  [4]  are removed. • For IELPRI=2, the code prints the standard reduced transition rates BEλ(I i -→ I f ) and/or BMλ(I i -→ I f ).
2  [4] , was lifted. Keyword: PROJECTGCM 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 0 IPRROT, IPROMI, IPROMA, NUAKNO, NUBKNO, KPROJE, IFRWAV, ITOWAV, IWRWAV The name of the first variable was changed to IPRROT and thus this variable was made independent form the first variable read under keyword PROJECTGCM, see Section 2. 16. 6. For IPRROT=0, the remaining input data read under keyword PROJECTGCM are now ignored. For IPRGCM=2, apart from a positive value of IFRWAV, previously implemented in Section VI-3. 2  [6] , the version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd now accepts its negative value, whereupon the calculation of the GCM kernels is performed between states with labels -IFRWAV and ITOWAV only, and not between all states with labels from a postive label IFRWAV to ITOWAV. In the version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd, the angular-momentum projection (AMP) was implemented for the GCM kernels, so for NUAKNO =1 or NUBKNO =1, IPRGCM=2 is now allowed.
Keyword: SAVEKERNEL 0 = ISAKER Apart from the values of ISAKER=0 or 1, previously implemented in Section VI-3. 2  [6] , the version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd now accepts the value of ISAKER=2, whereupon the kernel file is stored on the disc in a new format. Although the old format, requested by ISAKER=1, is still supported, it should be considered obsolete. The use of the old format is not recommended because some newly developed features may then be improperly stored. In particular, ISAKER=1 is incompatible with KETAJ2=1, KETAT2=1, NPNKNO>1, NTZKNO>1, or NPAKNO>1. For ISAKER=2 and IPAKER=1 (see Section VI-3. 2  [6] ), for all values of indices "t" the code attempts reading the kernel files Nxxxxxt-Lyyy-Rzzz-//FILKER, where // denotes concatenated strings. The one-, three-, or five-digit indices are: • "xxxxx" is the consecutive index of the kernel file, which is equal to KFIKER (see Section VII-3.
2  [7] ), • "t" is the number from 0 to 9 of the consecutive file having the given index "xxxxx", The code hfodd can be perfectly well run with array sizes smaller than the maximum ones specified above; the only consequence would be a non-optimal memory usage. If a given requested array size exceeds the maximum, the code stops and prints the new maximum size that has to be used at compilation. • hfodd_modules_35. f: Definitions of memory-consuming modules. Defines, among others, the matrices of the Bogolyubov transformation, the eigenvectors of the HF and HFB equations, etc. • hfodd_hfbtho_201. f90: hfbtho DFT solver based on version 200d published in Ref. [80]. • hfodd_interface_5. f90: Interface between the hfbtho and hfodd solvers. Contains the routine to transform the HFB matrix from the HO basis used in hfbtho (hfodd) to the basis used in hfodd (hfbtho).
• hfodd_pnp_8. f90: Toolkit for particle number projection (not supported in the present version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd). • hfodd_fits_16. f90: Fit module. Allows the code hfodd to work as a routine in an external program. • hfodd_lipcorr_31. f90: Toolkit for the Lipkin method and Pfaffian overlap calculations. • hfodd_tgrad_18. f90: Toolkit for the three-body gradient terms. • hfodd_wigner_6. f90: Toolkit for the Wigner functions. The FORTRAN source of version (v3. 06h) of the code hfodd contains numerous undocumented and untested features that are under development. The user should not attempt to activate or reverse-engineer these features, because this can certainly lead to an unpredictable behavior of the code and even damage to computer hard drive.
Acknowledgments We would like to thank  Nicolas Schunck  for performing benchmark calculations with his codes. This work was partially supported by the  STFC  Grant Nos. ST/M006433/1  and  ST/P003885/1 , and by the  Polish National Science Centre  under Contract No. 2018/31/B/ST2/02220. Work of MB and KB was supported by the  Agence Nationale de la Recherche  under grant No. 19-CE31-0015-01  (NEWFUN). We acknowledge the  CSC-IT Center for Science Ltd. , Finland , for the allocation of computational resources. We gratefully acknowledge support from the  CNRS/IN2P3 Computing Center (Lyon -France ) for providing computing and data-processing resources needed for this work. This project was partly undertaken on the Viking Cluster, which is a high performance compute facility provided by the  University of York.
Flow cytometry. BM samples were tested within 24 h of collection. Briefly, following NH 4 Cl red blood cell lysis, cells were stained with conjugated antibodies (CD45-KrO, CD19-PC7, CD34-ECD, CD10-FITC, CD38-APC, CD58-PC5, CD66c-PE, and CD123-PE) for 30 min at 4 °C and washed twice with FACS buffer (PBS, 2% FCS, and 1 mM EDTA). Data were acquired on Navios cytometer (Beckman Coulter) and analysis was made using Kaluza software (Beckman Coulter). For cell sorting, cells stained with CD19-APC, CD3-PE, and LIVE/ DEAD™ Fixable Aqua Dead Cell Stain Kit (Invitrogen) were FACS-sorted using BD-Influx™ cytometer (Becton Dickinson). Antibodies used for flow cytometry are listed in Supplementary Table  2. Antibody-HTO conjugation. Anti-CD45 antibody (clone HI30) provided by BioLegend was irreversibly conjugated to HTO (sequences shown in Supplementary Table  1 ), using an inverse electron-demand Diels-Alder reaction between methyltetrazine (mTz) and trans-cyclooctene (TCO) as previously described  26  , and according to the protocol found at www.