MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156456539 · doi:10.1139/p10-119

The chemical composition of the sun<sup>1</sup>This review is part of a Special Issue on the 10th International Colloquium on Atomic Spectra and Oscillator Strengths for Astrophysical and Laboratory Plasmas.

2011· article· en· W2156456539 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
N. Grevesse, M. Asplund, A. J. Sauval, Pat Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstronSpectral linePhotosphereAstrophysicsLithium (medication)Solar physicsStandard solar modelHomogeneousAstronomyNuclear physicsSolar neutrinoStatistical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have very recently re-determined the abundances of nearly all the available chemical elements in the solar photosphere, from lithium to thorium (Asplund et al. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 47, 481 (2009)). This new complete and homogeneous analysis results from a very careful selection of spectral lines of all the indicators of the abundances present in the solar photospheric spectrum, from a discussion of the atomic and molecular data, and from an analysis of these lines based on a new 3D model of the solar outer layers, taking non-LTE effects into account when possible. We present these new results, compare them with other recent solar data as well as with recent results for the solar neighborhood, and discuss some of their most important implications as well as some of the atomic data we still urgently need.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations46
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207