MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3004358793 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stab500

3D1D hydro-nucleosynthesis simulations – I. Advective–reactive post-processing method and its application to H ingestion into He-shell flash convection in rapidly accreting white dwarfs

2021· article· en· W3004358793 on OpenAlexafffund
David W. Stephens, Falk Herwig, Paul R. Woodward, Pavel A. Denissenkov, Róbert Andrássy, Huaqing Mao

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsAdvectionNucleosynthesisEntrainment (biomusicology)AstrophysicsWhite dwarfMixing (physics)ConvectionDiffusionStarsMechanicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We present two mixing models for post-processing of 3D hydrodynamic simulations applied to convective–reactive i-process nucleosynthesis in a rapidly accreting white dwarf (RAWD) with [Fe/H] = −2.6, in which H is ingested into a convective He shell. A 1D advective two-stream model adopts physically motivated radial and horizontal mixing coefficients constrained by 3D hydrodynamic simulations. A simpler approach uses diffusion coefficients calculated from the same simulations. All 3D simulations include the energy feedback of the 12C(p, γ)13N reaction from the H entrainment. Global oscillations of shell H ingestion in two of the RAWD simulations cause bursts of entrainment of H and non-radial hydrodynamic feedback. With the same nuclear network as in the 3D simulations, the 1D advective two-stream model reproduces the rate and location of the H burning within the He shell closely matching the 3D simulation predictions, as well as qualitatively displaying the asymmetry of the XH profiles between the upstream and downstream. With a full i-process network the advective mixing model captures the difference in the n-capture nucleosynthesis in the upstream and downstream. For example, 89Kr and 90Kr with half-lives of $3.18\,\,\mathrm{\mathrm{min}}$ and $32.3\,\,\mathrm{\mathrm{s}}$ differ by a factor 2–10 in the two streams. In this particular application the diffusion approach provides globally the same abundance distribution as the advective two-stream mixing model. The resulting i-process yields are in excellent agreement with observations of the exemplary CEMP-r/s star CS31062-050.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.730

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations23
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicNuclear physics research studiesFrench-language works237,207