Asteroseismic modelling of solar-type stars: a deeper look at the treatment of initial helium abundance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Detailed understanding of stellar physics is essential towards a robust determination of stellar properties (e.g. radius, mass, and age). Among the vital input physics used in the modelling of solar-type stars which remain poorly constrained, is the initial helium abundance. To this end, when constructing stellar model grids, the initial helium abundance is estimated either (i) by using the semi-empirical helium-to-heavy element enrichment ratio, (ΔY/ΔZ), anchored to the standard big bang nucleosynthesis value, or (ii) by setting the initial helium abundance as a free variable. Adopting 35 low-mass, solar-type stars with multiyear Kepler photometry from the asteroseismic ‘LEGACY’ sample, we explore the systematic uncertainties on the inferred stellar parameters (i.e. radius, mass, and age) arising from the treatment of the initial helium abundance in stellar model grids. The stellar masses and radii derived from grids with free initial helium abundance are lower compared to those from grids based on a fixed ΔY/ΔZ ratio. We find the systematic uncertainties on mean density, radius, mass, and age arising from grids which employ a fixed value of ΔY/ΔZ and those with free initial helium abundance to be ∼ 0.9 per cent, ∼ 2 per cent, ∼ 5 per cent, and ∼ 29 per cent, respectively. We report that the systematic uncertainties on the inferred masses and radii arising from the treatment of initial helium abundance in stellar grids lie within the expected accuracy limits of ESA’s PLATO, although this is not the case for the age.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".