The impact of (n, <i>γ</i> ) reaction rate uncertainties of unstable isotopes near <i>N</i> = 50 on the i-process nucleosynthesis in He-shell flash white dwarfs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The first-peak s-process elements Rb, Sr, Y and Zr in the post-AGB star Sakurai's object (V4334 Sagittarii) have been proposed to be the result of i-process nucleosynthesis in a post-AGB very-late thermal pulse event. We estimate the nuclear physics uncertainties in the i-process model predictions to determine whether the remaining discrepancies with observations are significant and point to potential issues with the underlying astrophysical model. We find that the dominant source in the nuclear physics uncertainties are predictions of neutron capture rates on unstable neutron rich nuclei, which can have uncertainties of more than a factor 20 in the band of the i-process. We use a Monte Carlo variation of 52 neutron capture rates and a 1D multi-zone post-processing model for the i-process in Sakurai's object to determine the cumulative effect of these uncertainties on the final elemental abundance predictions. We find that the nuclear physics uncertainties are large and comparable to observational errors. Within these uncertainties the model predictions are consistent with observations. A correlation analysis of the results of our MC simulations reveals that the strongest impact on the predicted abundances of Rb, Sr, Y and Zr is made by the uncertainties in the (n, γ ) reaction rates of 85 Br, 86 Br, 87 Kr, 88 Kr, 89 Kr, 89 Rb, 89 Sr, and 92 Sr. This conclusion is supported by a series of multi-zone simulations in which we increased and decreased to their maximum and minimum limits one or two reaction rates per run. We also show that simple and fast one-zone simulations should not be used instead of more realistic multi-zone stellar simulations for nuclear sensitivity and uncertainty studies of convective–reactive processes. Our findings apply more generally to any i-process site with similar neutron exposure, such as rapidly accreting white dwarfs with near-solar metallicities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".