MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386482639 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acea83

Three-dimensional General-relativistic Simulations of Neutrino-driven Winds from Magnetized Proto–Neutron Stars

2023· article· en· W4386482639 on OpenAlexafffund
Dhruv Desai, Daniel M. Siegel, Brian D. Metzger

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphPerimeter Institute
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsNeutron starEjectaOutflowSupernovaNeutrinoAstrophysicsNucleosynthesisField lineMagnetic fieldDipolePolarMagnetospherePlasmaAstronomyNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Formed in the aftermath of a core-collapse supernova or neutron star merger, a hot proto–neutron star (PNS) launches an outflow driven by neutrino heating lasting for up to tens of seconds. Though such winds are considered potential sites for the nucleosynthesis of heavy elements via the rapid neutron capture process (r-process), previous work has shown that unmagnetized PNS winds fail to achieve the necessary combination of high entropy and/or short dynamical timescale in the seed nucleus formation region. We present three-dimensional general-relativistic magnetohydrodynamical simulations of PNS winds which include the effects of a dynamically strong (B ≳ 1015 G) dipole magnetic field. After initializing the magnetic field, the wind quickly develops a helmet-streamer configuration, characterized by outflows along open polar magnetic field lines and a “closed” zone of trapped plasma at lower latitudes. Neutrino heating within the closed zone causes the thermal pressure of the trapped material to rise in time compared to the polar outflow regions, ultimately leading to the expulsion of this matter from the closed zone on a timescale of ∼60 ms, consistent with the predictions of Thompson. The high entropies of these transient ejecta are still growing at the end of our simulations and are sufficient to enable a successful second-peak r-process in at least a modest ≳1% of the equatorial wind ejecta.

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)0.002
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research→French-language works237,207→