MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014028485 · doi:10.1093/mnras/staa763

On monolithic supermassive stars

2020· article· en· W3014028485 on OpenAlexafffund
Tyrone E. Woods, Alexander Heger, L. Haemmerlé

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
FundersNational Research Council CanadaScience and Technology Commission of Shanghai MunicipalityNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsStarsSupermassive black holeMetallicityQuasarContext (archaeology)GalaxyAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Supermassive stars have been proposed as the progenitors of the massive ($\sim \!10^{9}\, \mathrm{M}_{\odot }$) quasars observed at z ∼ 7. Prospects for directly detecting supermassive stars with next-generation facilities depend critically on their intrinsic lifetimes, as well as their formation rates. We use the one-dimensional stellar evolution code kepler to explore the theoretical limiting case of zero-metallicity non-rotating stars, formed monolithically with initial masses between $10$ and $190\, \mathrm{kM}_{\odot }$. We find that stars born with masses between $\sim\! 60$ and $\sim\! 150\, \mathrm{kM}_{\odot }$ collapse at the end of the main sequence, burning stably for $\sim\! 1.5\, \mathrm{Myr}$. More massive stars collapse directly through the general relativistic instability after only a thermal time-scale of $\sim\! 3$–$4\, \mathrm{kyr}$. The expected difficulty in producing such massive thermally relaxed objects, together with recent results for currently preferred rapidly accreting formation models, suggests that such ‘truly direct’ or ‘dark’ collapses may not be typical for supermassive objects in the early Universe. We close by discussing the evolution of supermassive stars in the broader context of massive primordial stellar evolution and the possibility of supermassive stellar explosions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations31
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicGamma-ray bursts and supernovaeFrench-language works237,207