 intermediate ring (dashed line) and outer ring (dotted line), compared to the measured values for the first (solid circles), second (empty circles) and third (empty squares) rings. Note the different scales of the two figures.[]{data-label="fig:NEROeffRing"}](fig6a "fig:"){width="6.5cm"}![(Color online). Left: MCNP-calculated total efficiency as a function of the neutron energy $E_{n}$ scaled to the experimental data (solid line) and unscaled (dotted line), compared with measurements for the reactions $^{11}$B($\alpha$,n) (solid circle), $^{13}$C($\alpha$,n) (empty triangles), $^{51}$V(p,n) (empty circles), and with the $^{252}$Cf neutron source (solid square). The energy width of the $^{252}$Cf measurement was calculated according to the shortest-interval criterion defined by W. Brüchle for asymmetric distributions [@Bru03]. Right: MCNP-calculated efficiencies as a function of neutron energy $E_{n}$ for the innermost ring (solid line), intermediate ring (dashed line) and outer ring (dotted line), compared to the measured values for the first (solid circles), second (empty circles) and third (empty squares) rings. Note the different scales of the two figures.[]{data-label="fig:NEROeffRing"}](fig6b "fig:"){width="6.5cm"}

As shown in Fig. \[fig:NEROeffRing\] (right), the efficiencies calculated independently for each ring follow reasonably well the energy trends of the experimental data. For all the reactions investigated, MCNP reproduces the efficiency of the innermost ring, which is the most efficient of the three. The agreement is somewhat worse for the other rings at the lowest energies. In particular, the calculations overestimate the efficiency of the middle ring by about 3% at energies below 700 keV. We investigated the possibility that this discrepancy could be related to the type of detectors used. Several test measurements of the efficiency were performed with a $^{252}$Cf source, using one single $^{3}$He proportional counter placed in the first, second and third ring, using the $^{252}$Cf source. A comparison of the calculated efficiencies with the values measured under these conditions was consistent with the results shown in Fig. \[fig:NEROeffRing\] (right). The overall 5$\
intermediate ring (dashed line) and out gang (dotted line), compared to the quantify values for the first (hearty circles), second (empty circles) and third (empty square) rings. Note the unlike scales of the two figures.[]{data - label="fig: NEROeffRing"}](fig6a " fig:"){width="6.5cm"}![(Color online). Left: MCNP - calculated total efficiency as a affair of the neutron energy $ E_{n}$ scaled to the experimental data (solid line) and unscaled (dashed line), compared with measurements for the reaction $ ^{11}$B($\alpha$,n) (solid circle), $ ^{13}$C($\alpha$,n) (empty triangle), $ ^{51}$V(p, n) (empty circles), and with the $ ^{252}$Cf neutron beginning (solid square). The energy width of the $ ^{252}$Cf measurement was calculated according to the short - interval criterion defined by W.   Brüchle for asymmetric distributions   [ @Bru03 ]. justly: MCNP - calculated efficiencies as a function of neutron energy $ E_{n}$ for the innermost ring (solid line), intermediate ring (dart line) and outer band (dashed occupation), compared to the measured value for the inaugural (solid circles), second (empty circle) and third (empty squares) rings. Note the different scales of the two figures.[]{data - label="fig: NEROeffRing"}](fig6b " fig:"){width="6.5 cm " } 

 As shown in Fig.   \[fig: NEROeffRing\ ] (right), the efficiency calculated independently for each ring follow reasonably well the department of energy trends of the experimental datum. For all the reactions investigated, MCNP reproduces the efficiency of the innermost ring, which is the most effective of the three. The agreement is somewhat worse for the other rings at the lowest energies. In particular, the calculations overestimate the efficiency of the center ring by approximately 3% at energies below 700   keV. We investigated the possibility that this discrepancy could be related to the type of detector used. respective test measurements of the efficiency were perform with a $ ^{252}$Cf source, using one individual $ ^{3}$He proportional buffet placed in the beginning, second and third ring, using the $ ^{252}$Cf source. A comparison of the calculated efficiencies with the value measured under these conditions was coherent with the results shown in Fig.   \[fig: NEROeffRing\ ] (right). The overall 5$\
 inhermediate ring (dashed llne) and outer riut (dottxd line), comparea to the measured values for tye fiest (solid circles), secovd (empty bircles) abd tiird (empty squarxa) rings. Note fme diyfxrent scales of the two fhgures.[]{data-laben="fkg:UEROeffRing"}](fig6a "fig:"){width="6.5cm"}![(Color onlige). Left: MFNP-calculated jotal qffidpekcy as a function of the neutron energy $E_{n}$ scaled to the experimental data (solld llne) and unscaled (dltted line), xompweed with mearurements for the reacjions $^{11}$B($\alpha$,n) (solid circle), $^{13}$C($\alphx$,n) (em'ty trianglgs), $^{51}$V(o,t) (empty cirrles), agd with the $^{252}$Gg neutson soutce (solid squave). Thx enwrgy width of the $^{252}$Cf keasurement was cajculated dceording to the shortewt-untereal writdeiov dtfiied by W. Bgüchme for asyjmetric disrributions [@Bru03]. Right: MSBP-calculated sfficiqnsies as a function of neutron energy $E_{n}$ fod the innermost ring (sooid line), intermediate ring (dasred line) and outer ring (dotted line), compared to tve meesjreb valudw vor the first (solid circles), second (empty circjss) akd third (empty szuares) ringx. Joyg the differenj scales or the two figures.[]{dwta-labej="fig:NWROeffRind"}](fig6n "fig:"){width="6.5cm"}

As shown in Fig. \[dig:NEROeffRiug\] (eight), the efficieneies calculaced incepencently for each ring foulow reasonably well the dnergy trends of thv ex[erimental data. For all thq reactiois inrestigatdd, MVNP re[roduces tje efnhciency of the innfrmosj ring, which is hhe most efficient of the three. The agreement iv smmewhat corse nor the other ryngs at the locest enexgies. Kn particumar, the calculatiogs overestimadg the efficieicy of thq miedle ring bh about 3% at enetgies below 700 keV. We unvestigated the ppsskgility that thiw duscrepancy coulc bd rqlwtxd to dhe type of geteztofx usea. Several tcst meaxurements of the effhciehcy were performed wlth a $^{252}$Cf wource, ufing one singke $^{3}$He proportional counver pleced im tre first, second and third ring, using thf $^{252}$Cn source. A coiparlson of the cakculated efficiencies with the values mxasured under these coneitions was consistgnt with the rxsults shown in Fig. \[fig:NEROeffRing\] (rught). The overall 5$\
intermediate ring (dashed line) and outer ring compared the measured for the first and (empty squares) rings. the different scales the two figures.[]{data-label="fig:NEROeffRing"}](fig6a "fig:"){width="6.5cm"}![(Color online). Left: total efficiency as a function of the neutron energy $E_{n}$ scaled to the data (solid line) and unscaled (dotted line), compared with measurements for the reactions (solid $^{13}$C($\alpha$,n) triangles), (empty circles), and with the $^{252}$Cf neutron source (solid square). The energy width of the $^{252}$Cf was calculated according to the shortest-interval criterion defined W. Brüchle for asymmetric [@Bru03]. Right: MCNP-calculated efficiencies as function neutron energy for innermost (solid line), intermediate (dashed line) and outer ring (dotted line), compared to the measured values for the first (solid circles), (empty circles) (empty squares) Note different of the two As shown in Fig. \[fig:NEROeffRing\] (right), independently for each ring follow reasonably well the trends of experimental data. For all the reactions MCNP reproduces the efficiency of the innermost ring, is the most efficient of the three. The agreement is somewhat worse for the other the lowest energies. In the calculations overestimate efficiency the ring about 3% energies below 700 keV. We investigated the possibility that this discrepancy be related to the type of detectors used. Several test the were performed with $^{252}$Cf source, using one $^{3}$He counter placed in the and ring, source. comparison the calculated efficiencies with values measured under these conditions consistent with the results The overall 5$\
 intermediate ring (dashed linE) and outer rIng (doTteD liNe), CompAred To the measured vALues For the first (solid circleS), secoNd (EMpty CIrCles) aNd third (EMpTY SquArEs) RinGs. nOtE the dIffErent scAles of the tWo fIgUres.[]{data-labeL="FiG:NEROeffRiNg"}](fIg6a "fig:"){width="6.5cM"}![(CoLor onlInE). LeFT: MCNP-CalCulatEd totaL EfficiEncy as a fuNcTIon of tHE neutroN ENeRgy $E_{N}$ scaled to the experIMeNTal data (solid liNe) and uNsCAlED (DotTed Line), comparEd With mEAsuremeNTs FOR The REactions $^{11}$B($\alphA$,n) (solid circLE), $^{13}$C($\aLpha$,n) (eMpTy tRIangleS), $^{51}$V(p,n) (eMpTY ciRcles), and witH the $^{252}$cf neutron Source (SOlid squARe). The enErgy wiDth Of tHe $^{252}$Cf MEaSuRemEnT Was CAlCulATed AccordinG tO tHe shoRtesT-INTErvaL crIterIon deFined by W. BrüchLe fOr asYMmeTric dIstriButiOnS [@Bru03]. RIght: MCnP-calCuLated efficienciEs as A function Of nEuTroN eNergy $e_{N}$ for thE inNerMost rinG (solid lINe), iNtERMEdIate ring (dashed line) AnD OUtEr ring (doTted liNE), cOmPAred to thE mEasUred VALues fOr thE FiRst (solid CircleS), SeCoNd (empty CiRcles) aNd ThiRd (eMpty sQUareS) rings. note the dIfferENt scales of the tWO figures.[]{data-lABeL="FIg:neROeFfRIng"}](fig6b "fig:"){wIdth="6.5CM"}

As sHown IN FIg. \[fIG:NEROEffRiNg\] (RIgHT), the efficiencies calCuLated iNdepeNdently for eacH ring folloW REAsonably Well THe ENergy trends of tHe expErimental dATa. For all The reActions iNvestigatED, mCNP reprOduCes The EffICIeNcy of the innerMOSt riNg, Which is The Most effIciEnt Of tHe tHrEe. The agreEment is sOmEwHaT wOrsE for tHE other riNgS at ThE loWest eNErgies. in parTicuLaR, tHE caLculatiONs OVEresTiMaTe thE efFiCiencY of tHE miDdle rinG by about 3% aT enERgieS bElOw 700 keV. We Investigated tHe PossibilitY tHat This diSCRepancy cOuld be related to the type oF DetectoRs uSed. SeVeraL test measUreMents oF thE EfficiEncy weRe perFoRmeD WIth a $^{252}$CF SOuRce, UsIng one singLE $^{3}$he pRoporTiOnal Counter Placed in the first, seCOnd And third ring, uSinG the $^{252}$cF SoUrcE. a cOMpaRiSOn oF THe calculated effIciencies wItH ThE values meaSUreD uNder theSe condiTions WAs consiStent with The resultS sHown IN fig. \[Fig:NEROeffring\] (righT). The overaLL 5$\
 intermediate ring (dashed  line) and  oute r r ing  ( dott ed l ine), compared to t he measured values for  thefi r st ( s ol id ci rcles), se c o nd(e mp tyci r cl es) a ndthird ( empty squa res )rings. Notet he  different  sc ales of thetwo  figur es .[] { data- lab el="f ig:NER O effRin g"}](fig6 a" fig:") { width=" 6 . 5c m"}! [(Color online).L ef t : MCNP-calcula ted to ta l  e f f ici enc y as a fun ct ion o f  the ne u tr o n ene r gy $E_{n}$ sc aled to the exp erimen ta l d a ta (so lid l in e ) a nd unscaled  (do tted line ), com p ared wi t h measu rement s f orther ea ct ion s$ ^{1 1 }$ B($ \ alp ha$,n) ( so li d cir cle) , $ ^ {13} $C( $\al pha$, n) (empty tri ang les) ,  $^ {51}$ V(p,n ) (e mp ty ci rcles) , and  w ith the $^{252} $Cfneutron s our ce  (s ol id sq u are).The  en ergy wi dth oft he$^ { 2 5 2} $Cf measurement wa sc a lc ulated a ccordi n gto the shor te st- inte r v al cr iter i on  defined  by W. Br üc hle for  a symmet ri c d ist ribut i ons[@Bru0 3]. Righ t: MC N P-calculated e f ficiencies as af u nc t ionofneutron ene rgy$ E_{n }$ f o rthe inner mostri n g( solid line), interm ed iate r ing ( dashed line)and outerr i n g (dotte d li n e) ,  compared to t he me asured val u es for t he fi rst (sol id circle s ) , second  (e mpt y c irc l e s)  and third (e m p ty s qu ares) r ing s. Note  th e d iff ere nt  scales o f the tw ofi gu re s.[ ]{dat a -label=" fi g:N ER Oef fRing " }](fig 6b "f ig:" ){ wi d th= "6.5cm" } 
A s  sho wn  i n Fi g.\[ fig:N EROe f fRi ng\] (r ight), th e e f fici en ci es calc ulated indepe nd ently forea chring f o l low reas onably well the energyt rends o f t he ex peri mental da ta.  For a llt he rea ctions  inve st iga t e d, MC N P  r epr od uces the e f f ici encyof  the  innerm ost ring, which is the  most efficie ntof t h e  t hre e .T heag r eem e n t is somewhat w orse for t he ot her ringsa t t he  lowest  energi es. I n  partic ular, the  calculat io ns o v e res timate the  efficie ncy of th e  midd l eringbyabout3%  at  ener gies b e low  700keV. W einvest igate dthe poss ibility that this discr epancy  coul d b e related  to the  type ofdete ctors used . S eve ral t est measu reme n ts  of the e ffic i ency were pe rfo r m ed  with a $^{ 2 5 2 }$C f sou rce ,  using  one  single $^{3}$Hep roportional co unte r pla ced in t he  first, second  an dt h ird ring ,using the $ ^{252}$C fs ource . A co mparis on of t h e  c a lculat ed e ffi ciencieswit ht he valu es  m e asured  und er  these  condi t ions w as consistent wi th th e resul t s s hownin  Fig. \ [ fig: NEROeffRin g\] (right) . Theover all 5 $\
 intermediate_ring (dashed_line) and outer ring_(dotted line),_compared_to the_measured_values for the_first (solid circles),_second (empty circles) and_third (empty squares)_rings._Note the different scales of the two figures.[]{data-label="fig:NEROeffRing"}](fig6a "fig:"){width="6.5cm"}![(Color online). Left: MCNP-calculated total efficiency_as_a function_of_the_neutron energy $E_{n}$ scaled to_the experimental data (solid line)_and unscaled_(dotted line), compared with measurements for the reactions_$^{11}$B($\alpha$,n)_(solid circle), $^{13}$C($\alpha$,n)_(empty triangles), $^{51}$V(p,n) (empty circles), and with the $^{252}$Cf_neutron source (solid square). The energy_width of the_$^{252}$Cf_measurement_was calculated according to_the shortest-interval criterion defined by W. Brüchle_for asymmetric distributions [@Bru03]. Right: MCNP-calculated efficiencies_as a function of neutron energy $E_{n}$_for the innermost ring (solid line),_intermediate ring (dashed line) and_outer ring_(dotted line), compared to the_measured values for_the first_(solid circles), second_(empty circles) and third (empty squares)_rings. Note the_different scales of the two figures.[]{data-label="fig:NEROeffRing"}](fig6b_"fig:"){width="6.5cm"}

As_shown in Fig. \[fig:NEROeffRing\]_(right),_the_efficiencies calculated_independently for each_ring_follow reasonably_well_the energy trends of the experimental_data._For all the reactions investigated, MCNP reproduces_the efficiency of the_innermost_ring, which is the_most efficient of the three._The agreement is somewhat worse for_the other_rings at_the lowest energies. In particular, the calculations overestimate the efficiency of_the middle ring by about 3%_at energies below 700 keV._We investigated_the_possibility that this_discrepancy_could be_related to the type of detectors used._Several test_measurements of the efficiency were performed_with a $^{252}$Cf source,_using_one single $^{3}$He proportional counter placed_in the first, second and third_ring, using the $^{252}$Cf source._A_comparison_of the calculated efficiencies with_the values measured under these conditions_was consistent with_the results shown in Fig. \[fig:NEROeffRing\] (right). The_overall_5$\