MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2332147304 · doi:10.3847/0004-637x/823/2/117

A SURVEY OF CHEMICAL SEPARATION IN ACCRETING NEUTRON STARS

2016· article· en· W2332147304 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemical compositionStarsNeutron starHydrogenHeliumRange (aeronautics)ConvectionAbundance of the chemical elementsDispersion (optics)Accretion (finance)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The heavy element ashes of rp-process hydrogen and helium burning in accreting neutron stars are compressed to high density where they freeze, forming the outer crust of the star. We calculate the chemical separation on freezing for a number of different nuclear mixtures resulting from a range of burning conditions for the rp-process. We confirm the generic result that light nuclei are preferentially retained in the liquid and heavy nuclei in the solid. This is in agreement with the previous study of a 17-component mixture of rp-process ashes by Horowitz et al., but extends that result to a much larger range of compositions. We also find an alternative phase separation regime for the lightest ash mixtures which does not demonstrate this generic behavior. With a few exceptions, we find that chemical separation reduces the expected in the outer crust compared to the initial rp-process ash, where measures the mean-square dispersion in atomic number Z of the nuclei in the mixture. We find that the fractional spread of Z plays a role in setting the amount of chemical separation and is strongly correlated to the divergence between the two/three-component approximations and the full component model. The contrast in Y e between the initial rp-process ashes and the equilibrium liquid composition is similar to that assumed in earlier two-component models of compositionally driven convection, except for very light compositions which produce nearly negligible convective driving. We discuss the implications of these results for observations of accreting neutron stars.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations15
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies→French-language works237,207→