MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3214224661 · doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2022/04/002

Simulation of energy transport by dark matter scattering in stars

2022· article· en· W3214224661 on OpenAlexaff
Hannah Banks, Siyam Ansari, Aaron C. Vincent, Pat Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityArthur B. McDonald-Canadian Astroparticle Physics Research InstitutePerimeter Institute
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsPhysicsStarsDark matterAstrophysicsScatteringDark energyAstronomyEnergy transportNuclear physicsCosmologyEngineering physicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Asymmetric dark matter (ADM) that is captured in stars can act as an efficient conductor of heat. Small ADM-induced changes in a star's temperature gradient are known to alter neutrino fluxes and asteroseismological signatures, erase convective cores and modify a star's main sequence lifetime. The Sun's proximity to us makes it an ideal laboratory for studying these effects. However, the two formalisms commonly used to parametrize such heat transport were developed over 30 years ago, and calibrated with a single set of simulations. What's more, both are based on assumptions that break down at the Knudsen transition, where heat transport is maximized. We construct a Monte Carlo simulation to exactly solve the Boltzmann collision equation, determining the steady-state distribution and luminosity carried in stars by ADM with cross sections that depend on velocity and momentum. We find that, although the established (Gould & Raffelt) formalism based on local thermal equilibrium does well for constant cross sections, the isothermal (Spergel & Press) method actually performs better across all models with a simple, universal rescaling function. Based on simulation results, we provide recommendations on the parametrization of DM heat transport in stellar evolution models.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.718
Threshold uncertainty score0.294

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations14
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle PhysicsSame topicDark Matter and Cosmic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207