MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969325082 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab4f71

Spallation-altered Accreted Compositions for X-Ray Bursts: Impact on Ignition Conditions and Burst Ashes

2019· article· en· W2969325082 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationU.S. Department of EnergyNational Nuclear Security AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSpallationAccretion (finance)Neutron starNucleosynthesisThermalAtmosphere (unit)Nuclear reactionIgnition system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Model predictions of X-ray burst ashes and light curves depend on the composition of the material accreted from the companion star, in particular the abundance of CNO elements. It has previously been pointed out that spallation in the atmosphere of the accreting neutron star can destroy heavy elements efficiently. In this work we study this spallation using a realistic reaction network that follows the complete spallation cascade and takes into account not only destruction, but also production of elements by the spallation of heavier species. We find an increased survival probability of heavier elements compared to previous studies, resulting in significantly higher CNO abundances. We provide resulting compositions as a function of accretion rate, and explore their impact on 1D multi-zone X-ray burst models. We find significant changes in the composition of the burst ashes, which will affect the thermal and compositional structure of accreted neutron star crusts.

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)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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