MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Experimentally well-constrained masses of 27P and 27S: Implications for studies of explosive binary systems

2020· article· en· W2999453587 on OpenAlexaff
L. J. Sun, Xizeng Xu, S. Q. Hou, C. J. Lin, J. José, J. Lee, J. He, Z.H. Li, J. Wang, Cenxi Yuan, Falk Herwig, J Keegans, Tamas Budner, D.X. Wang, H. y. Wu, Pengfei Liang, Y. Y. Yang, Y. H. Lam, P. Ma, F. F. Duan, Zhihao Gao, Q. Hu, Z. Bai, J.B. Ma, J.G. Wang, F. P. Zhong, C. Wu, D. W. Luo, Y. Jiang, Yong Liu, D. S. Hou, R. Li, Nan-Ru Ma, Wangjing Ma, G. Z. Shi, Gongming Yu, D. Patel, Shichao Jin, Y. F. Wang, Y. C. Yu, Q. W. Zhou, P. Wang, Liyuan Hu, Xinqiang Wang, H. L. Zang, P. J. Li, Qiong Zhao, H. M. Jia, L. Yang, Peiwei Wen, F. Yang, Min Pan, Xiaoyong Wang, Ziyao Hu, Ruoxi Chen, M.L. Liu, W. Q. Yang, Y. M. Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics Letters B · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstronomical and nuclear sciences
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersYouth Innovation Promotion AssociationEuropean Regional Development FundChinese Academy of SciencesChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationAgència de Gestió d'Ajuts Universitaris i de RecercaYouth Innovation Promotion Association of the Chinese Academy of SciencesGeneralitat de CatalunyaMinistry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPhysicsExplosive materialAstrophysicsMonte Carlo methodReaction rateNova (rocket)ProtonNuclear physicsChemistryStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mass of 27 P is expected to impact the X-ray burst (XRB) model predictions of burst light curves and the composition of the burst ashes, but large uncertainties and inconsistencies still exist in the reported 27 P masses. We have used the β -decay spectroscopy of 27 S to determine the most precise mass excess of 27 P to date to be − 659 ( 9 ) keV, which is 63 keV (2.3 σ ) higher and a factor of 3 more precise than the value recommended in the 2016 Atomic Mass Evaluation. Based on the new 27 P mass, the Si 26 ( p , γ ) 27 P reaction rate and its uncertainty were recalculated using Monte Carlo techniques. We also estimated the previously unknown mass excess of 27 S to be 17678(77) keV, based on the measured β -delayed two-proton energy and the Coulomb displacement energy relations. The impact of these well-constrained masses and reaction rates on the modeling of the explosive astrophysical scenarios has been investigated by post-processing XRB and hydrodynamic nova models. Compared to the model calculations based on the masses and rates from databases, the abundance of A = 26 in the burst ashes is increased by a factor of 2.4, while no substantial change was found in the XRB energy generation rate or the light curve. Our calculation also suggests that 27 S is not a significant waiting point in the rapid proton capture process, and the change of the Si 26 ( p , γ ) 27 P reaction rate is not sufficiently large to affect the conclusion previously drawn on the nova contribution to the synthesis of galactic 26 Al.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics Letters BSame topicAstronomical and nuclear sciencesFrench-language works237,207