The Galactic deuterium abundance and dust depletion: insights from an expanded Ti/H sample★
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The primordial abundance of deuterium (D/H) yields a measure of the density of baryons in the Universe and is an important complement to determinations from cosmic microwave background (CMB) experiments. Indeed, the current small samples of high-redshift D/H measurements from quasar absorption line studies are in excellent agreement with CMB-derived values. Conversely, absorption line measurements of the Galactic D/H ratio in almost 50 stellar sightlines show a puzzlingly large scatter outside the local bubble which is difficult to explain simply by astration from the primordial value. The currently favoured explanation for these large variations is that D is differentially depleted relative to H in some parts of the local interstellar medium (ISM). Here, we test this scenario by studying the correlation between D/H and the abundance of titanium, one of the most refractory elements readily observed in the ISM. Previous work by Prochaska, Tripp & Howk found tentative evidence for a correlation between Ti/H and D/H based on seven sightlines. Here we almost triple the number of previous Ti measurements and include several sightlines with very high or low D/H that are critical for quantifying any correlations with D/H. With our larger sample, we confirm a correlation between Ti/H and D/H at the 97 per cent confidence level. However, the magnitude of this dependence is difficult to reconcile with a simple model of dust depletion for two reasons. First, contrary to what is expected from local depletion rates, the gradient of the highly refractory Ti is much shallower than that observed for Fe and Si. Secondly, we do not observe the established tight, steep correlation between [Ti/H] and the mean volume density of hydrogen. Therefore, whilst dust remains a plausible explanation for the local D/H variations, the abundances of at least some of the refractory elements do not provide unanimous support for this scenario. We also argue that the correlations of [Si/H], [Fe/H] and [Ti/H] with D/H are inconsistent with a simple infall model of low-metallicity gas with approximately solar abundances as the dominant cause for D variations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".