MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4302013272 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244281

Modelling of the scandium abundance evolution in AmFm stars

2022· article· en· W4302013272 on OpenAlexafffund
A. Hui-Bon-Hoa, G. Alecian, F. Leblanc

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
FundersCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCentre National d’Etudes Spatiales
KeywordsPhysicsStarsAstrophysicsRadiative transferMixing (physics)ScandiumStellar evolutionOpacityDiffusionAbundance of the chemical elementsThermodynamicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context. Scandium is a key element of the Am star phenomenon since its surface under-abundance is one of the criteria that characterise such stars. Thanks to the availability of a sufficiently complete set of theoretical atomic data for this element, reliable radiative accelerations for Sc can now be computed, which allows its behaviour under the action of atomic diffusion to be modelled. Aims. We explore the required conditions, in terms of mixing processes or mass loss, for our models to reproduce the observed surface abundances of Sc in Am stars. Methods. The models are computed with the Toulouse-Geneva evolution code, which uses the parametric single-valued parameter method for the calculation of radiative accelerations. Fingering mixing is included, using a prescription that comes from 3D hydrodynamical simulations. Other parameter-dependent turbulent mixing processes are also considered. A global mass loss is also implemented. Results. When no mass loss is considered, the observed abundances of Sc are rather in favour of the models whose superficial layers are fully mixed down to the iron accumulation zone, although other mixing prescriptions are also able to reproduce the observations for the most massive model presented here (2.0 M⊙). The models including mass loss with rates in the range of [10−13; 10−14] M⊙ yr−1 are compatible with some of the observations, while other observations suggest that the mass-loss rate could be lower. The constraints brought by the modelling of Sc are consistent with those derived using other chemical elements.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.173
Teacher spread0.165 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and AstrophysicsSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207