MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997653229 · doi:10.1086/341795

Seismic Test of Solar Models, Solar Neutrinos, and Implications for Metal‐rich Accretion

2002· article· en· W1997653229 on OpenAlexaff
Rebeccah Winnick, P. Demarque, Sarbani Basu, D. B. Guenther

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNeutrino Physics Research
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHelioseismologyStandard solar modelSolar coreConvection zoneAstrophysicsSolar neutrinoPhysicsMetallicityNeutrinoSolar neutrino problemAccretion (finance)AstronomyGeophysicsNeutrino oscillationStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Sun is believed to have been the recipient of a substantial amount of metal-rich material over the course of its evolution, particularly in the early stages of the Solar System. With a long diffusion timescale, the majority of this accreted matter should still exist in the solar convection zone, enhancing its observed surface abundance, and implying a lower-abundance core. While helioseismology rules out solar models with near-zero metallicity cores, some solar models with enhanced metallicity in the convection zone might be viable, as small perturbations to the standard model. Because of the reduced interior opacity and core temperature, the neutrino flux predicted for such models is lower than that predicted by the standard solar model. This paper examines how compatible inhomogeneous solar models of this kind are with the observed low-l p-mode oscillation data, and with the solar neutrino data from the SNO Collaboration. We set an upper limit on how much metal-rich accretion took place during the early evolution of the Sun at ∼ 2M ⊕ of iron (or ∼ 40M ⊕ of meteoric material). Subject headings: Sun: accretion, evolution, interior, oscillations, neutrinos 1.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.322
Threshold uncertainty score0.488

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations52
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicNeutrino Physics ResearchFrench-language works237,207