MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2296465908 · doi:10.3847/0004-637x/831/1/13

URCA COOLING PAIRS IN THE NEUTRON STAR OCEAN AND THEIR EFFECT ON SUPERBURSTS

2016· article· en· W2296465908 on OpenAlexaff
Alex Deibel, Z. Meisel, H. Schatz, Edward F. Brown, A. Cumming

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeutron starPhysicsNeutrinoAstrophysicsThermonuclear fusionLuminosityAccretion (finance)Nuclear physicsPlasmaGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT An accretion outburst onto a neutron star deposits hydrogen-rich and/or helium-rich material into the neutron star’s envelope. Thermonuclear burning of accreted material robustly produces Urca pairs—pairs of nuclei that undergo cycles of -capture and -decay. The strong T 5 dependence of the Urca cooling neutrino luminosity means that Urca pairs in the neutron star interior potentially remove heat from accretion-driven nuclear reactions. In this study, we identify Urca pairs in the neutron star’s ocean—a plasma of ions and electrons overlaying the neutron star crust—and demonstrate that Urca cooling occurs at all depths in the ocean. We find that Urca pairs in the ocean and crust lower the ocean’s steady-state temperature during an accretion outburst and that unstable carbon ignition, which is thought to trigger superbursts, occurs deeper than it would otherwise. Cooling superburst light curves, however, are only marginally impacted by cooling from Urca pairs because the superburst peak radiative luminosity is always much greater than the Urca pair neutrino luminosity in the hot post-superburst ocean.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations43
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicGamma-ray bursts and supernovaeFrench-language works237,207