 the giant resonance peak, as it is well known, RPA calculations based on EDF with effective masses lower than the bare nucleon mass overestimates the excitation energy. As it is also well known, the PVC approach introduces an energy dependence also in the real part of the self-energy that corrects the value of the effective mass [@bertsch1968] such that it is more realistic and compares better with the empirical value. On this regard, it seems that the results employing the [*subtraction method*]{} better reproduces the excitation energy of the giant resonance.

Isoscalar monopole response in ${}^{208}$Pb
-------------------------------------------

In Fig.\[fig8\], the isoscalar monopole response in ${}^{208}$Pb as predicted by the SAMi interaction is shown. In grey bars we show the RPA response while in dashed red lines the PVC without subtraction and in dot dashed blue lines the PVC with subtraction are displayed. A black arrow indicates the centroid energy $m_1/m_0=14.24\pm 0.11$ MeV measured within 8 and 22 MeV [@youngblood1999]. The centroid energy defined as the square root of the ratio between the EWSR and IEWSR is $\sqrt{m_1/m_{-1}}=14.18\pm 0.11$ MeV[@youngblood1999]. The width of the resonance has been measured to be between 2 and 3 MeV approximately (cf. Table 4.1 of Ref.[@harakeh2001]). In our calculations using SAMi, we find within 8 and 22 MeV that for the RPA the EWSR is 97%, $m_1/m_0 = 13.7$ MeV and $\sqrt{m_1/m_{-1}} = 13.5$ MeV; for the PVC without subtraction the EWSR is 91%, $m_1/m_0 = 13.4$ MeV and $\sqrt{m_1/m_{-1}} = 13.2$ MeV; and for the PVC with subtraction the EWSR is 91%, $m_1/m_0 = 13.7$ MeV and $\sqrt{m_1/m_{-1}} = 13.6$ MeV. The width predicted by our PVC calculations is of 2 MeV. Thus, SAMi predicts reasonable values for the excitation energy and width of this resonance both, with and without subtraction, since PVC effects are small as expected. It is well known within the R
the giant resonance peak, as it is well known, RPA calculations free-base on EDF with effective masse lower than the bare nucleon mass overestimates the excitation department of energy. As it is also well known, the PVC approach introduces an department of energy addiction also in the real part of the self - energy that corrects the value of the effective bulk [ @bertsch1968 ] such that it is more realistic and compares well with the empirical value. On this regard, it seems that the results employing the [ * subtraction method acting * ] { } better reproduces the excitation department of energy of the giant resonance. 

 Isoscalar monopole response in $ { } ^{208}$Pb 
 ------------------------------------------- 

 In Fig.\[fig8\ ], the isoscalar monopole response in $ { } ^{208}$Pb as predicted by the SAMi interaction is show. In grey bars we show the RPA response while in dashed red line the PVC without subtraction and in dot dashed blue lines the PVC with subtraction are displayed. A bootleg arrow bespeak the centroid energy $ m_1 / m_0=14.24\pm 0.11 $ MeV measured within 8 and 22 MeV [ @youngblood1999 ]. The centroid energy defined as the square root of the ratio between the EWSR and IEWSR is $ \sqrt{m_1 / m_{-1}}=14.18\pm 0.11 $ MeV[@youngblood1999 ]. The width of the resonance has been measured to be between 2 and 3 MeV approximately (californium. Table 4.1 of Ref.[@harakeh2001 ]). In our calculations use lapp, we find within 8 and 22 MeV that for the RPA the EWSR is 97% , $ m_1 / m_0 = 13.7 $ MeV and $ \sqrt{m_1 / m_{-1 } } = 13.5 $ MeV; for the PVC without subtraction the EWSR is 91% , $ m_1 / m_0 = 13.4 $ MeV and $ \sqrt{m_1 / m_{-1 } } = 13.2 $ MeV; and for the PVC with subtraction the EWSR is 91% , $ m_1 / m_0 = 13.7 $ MeV and $ \sqrt{m_1 / m_{-1 } } = 13.6 $ MeV. The width predict by our PVC calculations is of 2 MeV. Thus, SAMi predicts reasonable value for the excitation energy and width of this resonance both, with and without subtraction, since PVC effects are small as have a bun in the oven. It is well known within the R
 thf giant resonance peak, ar it is well known, RPA calcumations cased on EDF with effective lawses oower than the bare nuzleon masd overesrimaues the excitatioi energy. As it ls alvi well known, tme PVC apprmach introducev xn energy dependence also in the real part og hhe self-energy thau cjrredns the value of the effective mzss [@berusch1968] such that it os more realistic and compwres better with the elpirical vaoue. Jb this regara, it seems that the reaults employing the [*subtraction methpd*]{} better tzprofoces the excmtatiog energy of bne giatt resomance.

Isoscalar moiopooe response in ${}^{208}$Pb
-------------------------------------------

In Fmg.\[fig8\], the isoscalar ionopole seaponse in ${}^{208}$Pb as peeeicteg by the WAMk ihtxradtion ls ahown. In gdey bars we show the RPA respomsq while in dasged req jines the PVC without subtraction and it dkt dashed blue lines thw PVC with subtractioj are dis[layed. A black arrow indicates the centroid energf $m_1/m_0=14.24\pj 0.11$ MtV measjeef within 8 and 22 MeV [@youngblood1999]. The centroid enqdgu cefined as the square rooy lf jhe ratio betwgen the EWAR and IEWSR is $\sqgt{m_1/m_{-1}}=14.18\pm 0.11$ MeV[@yiungblood1999]. The width of the resonance has been measurvd ti be between 2 and 3 MeV approxnmateli (cf. Tsble 4.1 of Ref.[@harakeh2001]). In uur dalculationd using SZOi, we find withiv 8 sng 22 MeV that for the RPA thq EWSR is 97%, $m_1/m_0 = 13.7$ MeV xnd $\xqrt{m_1/m_{-1}} = 13.5$ MeV; for the IEC without subtrachion jhe EWVR is 91%, $m_1/m_0 = 13.4$ MeV and $\sqrt{m_1/m_{-1}} = 13.2$ MeV; and for vie PVC with sobtsacnion the ZWSR ix 91%, $m_1/m_0 = 13.7$ MeV agd $\sqrt{m_1/m_{-1}} = 13.6$ MeR. The wibth prddicted by our PVR calculatiogs is of 2 MeV. Jhus, SAMi previcts reafonavle calues wur the excitatoon energj cnd width of this resonance bojh, with and withobu sovtraction, sincr PXC qfverts awa small as efpecged. Ot is well known dithon the R
the giant resonance peak, as it is RPA based on with effective masses mass the excitation energy. it is also known, the PVC approach introduces an dependence also in the real part of the self-energy that corrects the value the effective mass [@bertsch1968] such that it is more realistic and compares better the value. this it seems that the results employing the [*subtraction method*]{} better reproduces the excitation energy of the resonance. Isoscalar monopole response in ${}^{208}$Pb ------------------------------------------- In the isoscalar monopole response ${}^{208}$Pb as predicted by the interaction shown. In bars show RPA response while dashed red lines the PVC without subtraction and in dot dashed blue lines the PVC with subtraction displayed. A indicates the energy 0.11$ measured within 8 MeV [@youngblood1999]. The centroid energy defined root of the ratio between the EWSR and is $\sqrt{m_1/m_{-1}}=14.18\pm MeV[@youngblood1999]. The width of the resonance been measured to be between 2 and 3 approximately (cf. Table 4.1 of Ref.[@harakeh2001]). In our calculations using SAMi, we find within 8 MeV that for the the EWSR is $m_1/m_0 13.7$ and = 13.5$ for the PVC without subtraction the EWSR is 91%, $m_1/m_0 = MeV and $\sqrt{m_1/m_{-1}} = 13.2$ MeV; and for the PVC the is 91%, $m_1/m_0 13.7$ MeV and $\sqrt{m_1/m_{-1}} 13.6$ The width predicted by calculations of SAMi reasonable for the excitation energy width of this resonance both, and without subtraction, since expected. It is well known within the R
 the giant resonance peak, as it Is well knowN, RPA cAlcUlaTiOns bAsed On EDF with effecTIve mAsses lower than the bare nUcleoN mASs ovEReStimaTes the eXCiTATioN eNeRgy. as IT iS also WelL known, tHe PVC approAch InTroduces an enERgY dependencE alSo in the real pArt Of the sElF-enERgy thAt cOrrecTs the vALue of tHe effectiVe MAss [@berTSch1968] such THAt It is More realistic and cOMpARes better with tHe empiRiCAl VALue. on tHis regard, iT sEems tHAt the reSUlTS EMplOYing the [*subtraCtion method*]{} BEttEr reprOdUceS The excItatiOn ENerGy of the gianT resOnance.

IsoScalar MOnopole REsponse In ${}^{208}$Pb
-------------------------------------------

In fig.\[Fig8\], The iSOsCaLar MoNOpoLE rEspONse In ${}^{208}$Pb as prEdIcTed by The SamI INterActIon iS showN. In grey bars we ShoW the rpA rEsponSe whiLe in DaShed rEd lineS the PvC Without subtractIon aNd in dot daSheD bLue LiNes thE pVC witH suBtrAction aRe displAYed. a bLACK aRrow indicates the ceNtROId Energy $m_1/m_0=14.24\Pm 0.11$ MeV mEAsUrED within 8 aNd 22 meV [@YounGBLood1999]. THe ceNTrOid energY definED aS tHe squarE rOot of tHe RatIo bEtweeN The EwSR and iEWSR is $\sQrt{m_1/m_{-1}}=14.18\PM 0.11$ MeV[@youngblood1999]. tHe width of the rESoNANcE Has bEen Measured to bE betWEen 2 aNd 3 Mev ApProXImateLy (cf. TAbLE 4.1 oF ref.[@harakeh2001]). In our calcUlAtions Using sAMi, we find witHin 8 and 22 MeV tHAT For the RPa the ewSr Is 97%, $m_1/m_0 = 13.7$ MeV and $\sqrt{M_1/m_{-1}} = 13.5$ MeV; For the PVC wIThout subTractIon the EWsR is 91%, $m_1/m_0 = 13.4$ MeV AND $\sqrt{m_1/m_{-1}} = 13.2$ MEV; aNd fOr tHe Pvc WiTh subtraction THE EWSr iS 91%, $m_1/m_0 = 13.7$ MeV aNd $\sQrt{m_1/m_{-1}} = 13.6$ Mev. ThE wiDth PreDiCted by our pVC calcuLaTiOnS iS of 2 meV. ThUS, SAMi preDiCts ReAsoNable VAlues fOr the ExciTaTiON enErgy and WIdTH Of thIs ReSonaNce BoTh, witH and WIthOut subtRaction, siNce pvC efFeCtS are smaLl as expected. IT iS well known WiThiN the R
 the giant resonance peak,  as it iswellkno wn,  R PA c alcu lations basedo n ED F with effective masse s low er than th e bar e nucle o nm a ssov er est im a te s the  ex citatio n energy.Asit  is also wel l  k nown, thePVC  approach in tro ducesan  en e rgy d epe ndenc e also in the  real par to f thes elf-ene r g ythat  corrects the val u eo f the effectiv e mass  [ @ be r t sch 196 8] such th at  it i s  more r e al i s t ica nd compares b etter witht heempiri ca l v a lue. O n thi sr ega rd, it seem s th at the re sultse mployin g  the [* subtra cti onmeth o d* ]{ } b et t err ep rod u ces  the exc it at ion e nerg y o f  the  gi antreson ance.

Isosca lar  mon o pol e res ponse  in${ }^{20 8}$Pb----- -- --------------- ---- --------- --- -- --- 
In Fi g .\[fig 8\] , t he isos calar m o nop ol e r es ponse in ${}^{208} $P b as  predict ed byt he  S A Mi inter ac tio n is s hown.  Ing re y bars w e show th eRPA res po nse wh il e i n d ashed redlinesthe PVCwitho u t subtractiona nd in dot das h ed b lu e  lin esthe PVC wit h su b trac tion ar e d i splay ed. A  b l ac k  arrow indicates th ecentro id en ergy $m_1/m_0 =14.24\pm0 . 1 1$ MeV m easu r ed within 8 and 2 2 MeV  [@youngbl o od1999].  Thecentroid  energy d e f ined asthe  sq uar e r o o tof the ratiob e twee nthe EWS R a nd IEWS R i s $ \sq rt{ m_ 1/m_{-1}} =14.18\p m0. 11 $MeV [@you n gblood19 99 ].Th e w idtho f thereson ance  h as bee n measu r ed t o be  b et ween  2an d 3 M eV a p pro ximatel y (cf. Ta ble 4.1of  R ef.[@ha rakeh2001]).In  our calcu la tio ns usi n g  SAMi, w e find within 8 and 22M eV that  fo r the  RPA  the EWSR  is  97%,$m_ 1 /m_0 =  13.7$  MeVan d $ \ s qrt{m _ 1 /m _{- 1} } = 13.5$M e V;for t he  PVC  withou t subtraction theE WSR  is 91%, $m_1 /m_ 0 =1 3 .4 $ M e Va nd$\ s qrt { m _1/m_{-1}} = 13 .2$ MeV; a nd fo r the PVCw ith  s ubtract ion the  EWSR is 91%,  $m_1/m_0  = 13.7$Me V an d $\s qrt{m_1/m_ {-1}} =13.6$ MeV .  Thew id th pr edi cted b your  PVCcalcul a tio ns is  of 2Me V. Thu s, SA Mi  predict s reasonable values for  the e xcita tio n energyand wid th of thi s re sonance bo th,  wi th an d w i thout  sub t ra cti o n, si nceP VC effect s  a res m al l as expect e d .  It  is w ell knownwith in the R
 the_giant resonance_peak, as it is_well known,_RPA_calculations based_on_EDF with effective_masses lower than_the bare nucleon mass_overestimates the excitation_energy._As it is also well known, the PVC approach introduces an energy dependence also_in_the real_part_of_the self-energy that corrects the_value of the effective mass_[@bertsch1968] such_that it is more realistic and compares better_with_the empirical value._On this regard, it seems that the results employing_the [*subtraction method*]{} better reproduces the_excitation energy of_the_giant_resonance.

Isoscalar monopole response in_${}^{208}$Pb
-------------------------------------------

In Fig.\[fig8\], the isoscalar monopole response_in ${}^{208}$Pb as predicted by the_SAMi interaction is shown. In grey bars_we show the RPA response while_in dashed red lines the_PVC without_subtraction and in dot dashed_blue lines the_PVC with_subtraction are displayed._A black arrow indicates the centroid_energy $m_1/m_0=14.24\pm 0.11$_MeV measured within 8 and 22_MeV_[@youngblood1999]. The centroid_energy_defined_as the_square root of_the_ratio between_the_EWSR and IEWSR is $\sqrt{m_1/m_{-1}}=14.18\pm 0.11$_MeV[@youngblood1999]._The width of the resonance has been_measured to be between_2_and 3 MeV approximately_(cf. Table 4.1 of Ref.[@harakeh2001])._In our calculations using SAMi, we_find within_8 and_22 MeV that for the RPA the EWSR is 97%, $m_1/m_0_= 13.7$ MeV and $\sqrt{m_1/m_{-1}} =_13.5$ MeV; for the_PVC without_subtraction_the EWSR is_91%,_$m_1/m_0 =_13.4$ MeV and $\sqrt{m_1/m_{-1}} = 13.2$ MeV;_and for_the PVC with subtraction the EWSR_is 91%, $m_1/m_0 =_13.7$_MeV and $\sqrt{m_1/m_{-1}} = 13.6$ MeV._The width predicted by our PVC_calculations is of 2 MeV._Thus,_SAMi_predicts reasonable values for the_excitation energy and width of this_resonance both, with_and without subtraction, since PVC effects are_small_as expected. It is well known_within_the R