A Convective Dredge-up Model as the Origin of Hydrogen in DBA White Dwarfs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We revisit the problem of the formation of DB white dwarfs, as well as the origin of hydrogen in DBA stars, using a new set of envelope model calculations with stratified and mixed hydrogen/helium compositions. We first describe an approximate model to simulate the so-called convective dilution process, where a thin, superficial hydrogen radiative layer is gradually eroded by the underlying and more massive convective helium envelope, thus transforming a DA white dwarf into a DB star. We show that this convective dilution process is able to account for the large increase in the number of DB white dwarfs below T eff ∼ 20,000 K, but that the residual hydrogen abundances expected from this process are still orders of magnitude lower than those observed in DBA white dwarfs. Scenarios involving the accretion of hydrogen from the interstellar medium or other external bodies have often been invoked to explain these overabundances of hydrogen. In this paper, we describe a new paradigm where hydrogen, initially diluted within the thick stellar envelope, is still present and slowly diffuses upward in the deeper layers of a T eff ∼ 20,000 K white dwarf. When the convective dilution process occurs, the bottom of the mixed H/He convection zone sinks deep into the star, resulting in large amounts of hydrogen being dredged up to the stellar surface, a phenomenon similar to that invoked in the context of DQ white dwarfs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".