MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063956712 · doi:10.1086/320911

The Evolutionary Timescale of Sakurai’s Object: A Test of Convection Theory?

2001· article· en· W2063956712 on OpenAlexaff
Falk Herwig

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsStellar evolutionAstrophysicsConvectionWhite dwarfMixing (physics)Asymptotic giant branchStellar massConvection zoneThermalStarsAstronomyStar formationMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sakurai's Object (V4334 Sagittarii) is a born-again asymptotic giant branch star following a very late thermal pulse . So far, no stellar evolution models have been able to explain the extremely fast evolution of this star, which has taken it from the pre-white dwarf stage to its current appearance as a giant within only a few years. A very high stellar mass can be ruled out as the cause of the fast evolution. Instead, the evolution timescale is reproduced in stellar models by making the assumption that the efficiency for element mixing in the He-flash convection zone during the very late thermal pulse is smaller than predicted by the mixing-length theory (MLT). As a result, the main energy generation from fast proton capture occurs closer to the surface, and the expansion to the giant state is accelerated to a few years. Assuming a mass of V4334 Sgr of 0.604 M ☉ —which is consistent with a distance of 4 kpc—a reduction of the MLT mixing efficiency by a factor of ~100 is required to match its evolutionary timescale. This value decreases if V4334 Sgr has a smaller mass and, accordingly, a smaller distance. However, the effect does not disappear for the smallest possible masses. These findings may present a semiempirical constraint on the element mixing in convective zones of the stellar interior.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations92
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207