MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1638974416 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/735/1/40

THE INFLUENCE OF UNCERTAINTIES IN THE<sup>15</sup>O(α, γ)<sup>19</sup>Ne REACTION RATE ON MODELS OF TYPE I X-RAY BURSTS

2011· article· en· W1638974416 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleosynthesisReaction rateMonte Carlo methodType (biology)NeutronNeutron star

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a Monte Carlo calculation of the astrophysical rate of the 15 O(α, γ) 19 Ne reaction based on an evaluation of published experimental data. By considering the likelihood distributions of individual resonance parameters derived from measurements, estimates of upper and lower limits on the reaction rate at the 99.73% confidence level are derived in addition to the recommended, median value. These three reaction rates are used as input for three separate calculations of Type I X-ray bursts (XRBs) using spherically symmetric, hydrodynamic simulations of an accreting neutron star. In this way the influence of the 15 O(α, γ) 19 Ne reaction rate on the peak luminosity, recurrence time, and associated nucleosynthesis in models of Type I XRBs is studied. Contrary to previous findings, no substantial effect on any of these quantities is observed in a sequence of four bursts when varying the reaction rate between its lower and upper limits. Rather, the differences in these quantities are comparable to the burst-to-burst variations with a fixed reaction rate, indicating that uncertainties in the 15 O(α, γ) 19 Ne reaction rate do not strongly affect the predictions of this Type I XRB model.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations34
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicGamma-ray bursts and supernovaeFrench-language works237,207