MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

<sup>30</sup>P(<i>p</i>,γ)<sup>31</sup>S Reaction Rate for Classical Novae: An Indirect Approach

2012· article· en· W1976658941 on OpenAlexaff
D. Irvine

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstronomical and nuclear sciences
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNova (rocket)NucleosynthesisEjectaPresolar grainsNeonPhysicsAbundance (ecology)ProtonReaction rateAstrophysicsNuclear physicsNuclear reactionAtomic physicsChemistrySupernova

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Isotopic abundance ratios of 30 Si/ 28 Si found in presolar SiC grains of suspected nova origin agree qualitatively with proposed oxygen-neon (ONe) nova composition but fail to agree quantitatively with ejecta predictions made by hydrodynamic ONe nova models. The Astrophysical 30 P(p,γ) 31 S reaction rate is a key quantity used in nova models that predict isotopic abundances produced during nucleosynthesis leading up to the outburst. Currently, there is a large uncertainty in the rate at nova temperatures (0.1 < T < 0.4 GK) causing the predicted 30 Si abundance ratio to vary by a factor of 4. The 30 P(p,γ) 31 S reaction rate can be determined indirectly by measuring triton momenta from 32 S(d,t) 31 S reactions. 31 S Resonant states measured up to 600 keV above the proton threshold of 6131 keV and within the Gamow window which contribute most significantly to the rate can then be used to re-evaluate the rate for nova temperatures and reduce the uncertainty.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicAstronomical and nuclear sciencesFrench-language works237,207