MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885409357 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2952

3D hydrodynamic simulations of C ingestion into a convective O shell

2019· article· en· W2885409357 on OpenAlexafffund
Róbert Andrássy, Falk Herwig, Paul R. Woodward, Christian Ritter

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsSupernovaAstrophysicsLuminosityConvectionInstabilityStarsMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Interactions between convective shells in evolved massive stars have been linked to supernova impostors, to the production of the odd-Z elements Cl, K, and Sc, and they might also help generate the large-scale asphericities that are known to facilitate shock revival in supernova explosion models. We investigate the process of ingestion of C-shell material into a convective O-burning shell, including the hydrodynamic feedback from the nuclear burning of the ingested material. Our 3D hydrodynamic simulations span almost 3 dex in the total luminosity Ltot. All but one of the simulations reach a quasi-stationary state with the entrainment rate and convective velocity proportional to Ltot and $L_\mathrm{tot}^{1/3}$, respectively. Carbon burning provides $14\!-\!33{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ of the total luminosity, depending on the set of reactions considered. Equivalent simulations done on 7683 and 11523 grids are in excellent quantitative agreement. The flow is dominated by a few large-scale convective cells. An instability leading to large-scale oscillations with Mach numbers in excess of 0.2 develops in an experimental run with the energy yield from C burning increased by a factor of 10. This run represents most closely the conditions expected in a violent O–C shell merger, which is a potential production site for odd-Z elements such as K and Sc and which may seed asymmetries in the supernova progenitor. 1D simulations may underestimate the energy generation from the burning of ingested material by as much as a factor 2 owing to their missing the effect of clumpiness of entrained material on the nuclear reaction rate.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.205
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 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

Citations62
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicGamma-ray bursts and supernovaeFrench-language works237,207