MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048665625 · doi:10.1086/512676

Germanium Production in Asymptotic Giant Branch Stars: Implications for Observations of Planetary Nebulae

2007· article· en· W2048665625 on OpenAlexaff
Amanda I. Karakas, Maria Lugaro, R. Gallino

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsymptotic giant branchNucleosynthesisPlanetary nebulaAstrophysicsPhysicsStarsAbundance (ecology)GermaniumFormation and evolution of the Solar SystemAstronomySolar SystemSilicon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Observations of planetary nebulae (PNe) in the work of Sterling, Dinerstein, & Bowers have revealed abundances in the neutron-capture element germanium (Ge) from solar to factors of 3-10 above solar. The enhanced Ge is an indication that the slow neutron-capture process (the s -process) operated in the parent star during the thermally pulsing asymptotic giant branch (TP-AGB) phase. We compute the detailed nucleosynthesis of a series of AGB models to estimate the surface enrichment of Ge near the end of the AGB. A partial mixing zone of constant mass is included at the deepest extent of each dredge-up episode, resulting in the formation of a 13 C pocket in the top approximately one-tenth of the He-rich intershell. All of the models show surface increases of [Ge/Fe] ≲ 0.5, except the 2.5 M ☉ , Z = 0.004 case, which produced a factor of 6 enhancement of Ge. Near the tip of the TP-AGB, a couple of extra thermal pulses (TPs) could occur to account for the composition of the most Ge-enriched PNe. Uncertainties in the theoretical modeling of AGB stellar evolution might account for larger Ge enhancements than we predict here. Alternatively, a possible solution could be provided by the occurrence of a late TP during the post-AGB phase. Difficulties related to spectroscopic abundance estimates also need to be taken into consideration. Further study is required to better assess how the model uncertainties affect the predictions and, consequently, if a late TP should be invoked.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations27
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicNuclear physics research studiesFrench-language works237,207